Bombshell: Former Clinton State Dept. Official Describes Benghazi Cover-Up Operation

If you thought there were no more Benghazi bombshells left to drop – think again.

Writing now at the Daily Signal, former CBS investigative Sharyl Attkisson reports that a top former State Department official is alleging that while the September 11, 2012 Benghazi terrorist attack was being investigated, senior aides were part of a secret operation to sift through and remove documents that were damaging to her highness – Sec. of State Hillary Clinton – before they could be turned over to the Accountability Review Board.

The Accountability Review Board was the internal State Department probe that was derided as a “whitewash” by Republicans on the Oversight and Reform committee for completely omitting Clinton and Obama from the investigation.

According to former Deputy Assistant Secretary Raymond Maxwell, the after-hours session took place over a weekend in a basement operations-type center at State Department headquarters in Washington, D.C. This is the first time Maxwell has publicly come forward with the story.

At the time, Maxwell was a leader in the State Department’s Bureau of Near Eastern Affairs (NEA), which was charged with collecting emails and documents relevant to the Benghazi probe . . .

When he arrived, Maxwell says he observed boxes and stacks of documents. He says a State Department office director, whom Maxwell described as close to Clinton’s top advisers, was there. Though the office director technically worked for him, Maxwell says he wasn’t consulted about her weekend assignment.

“She told me, ‘Ray, we are to go through these stacks and pull out anything that might put anybody in the [Near Eastern Affairs] front office or the seventh floor in a bad light,’” says Maxwell. He says “seventh floor” was State Department shorthand for then-Secretary of State Clinton and her principal advisors.

“I asked her, ‘But isn’t that unethical?’ She responded, ‘Ray, those are our orders.’ ”

A few minutes after he arrived, Maxwell says in walked two high-ranking State Department officials.

Yes, House Select Committee on Benghazi Chairman Rep. Trey Gowdy, R-S.C. and Rep. Jason Chaffetz, R-Utah have been made aware of this incriminating information. The first hearing of the House Select Committee on Benghazi will be held this week.


Twitchy: Cover-up unraveling? Brit Hume sees ‘big deal’ in Sharyl Attkisson’s Benghazi ‘bombshell’


Gateway Pundit: Rand Paul on Hillary’s Iowa Trip: I’d Like to See Her Back in DC Testifying on Benghazi (Video)

I’d like to see her back in Washington testifying about her role in the Benghazi tragedy. Frankly, there’s still a lot of questions. I asked herpoint blank when she came last time what were they doing in the CIA annex and did it have anything to do with the attacks. And, she acted as if she knew nothing about it. But, it’s funny now reports have been coming out for about a year, saying she was the biggest and most eager to get arms out of Libya to send them into Syria. So, there’s still a lot of questions we’ve got for her if she decides to come back here.”

I know that the Clinton machine has had two years to come up with a strategy to deal with the Benghazi scandal, and even with the MSM pulling in her favor, I still don’t know how she weasels out of this. Of course, history tells us, when the Democrat media complex and their chosen candidate have all their ducks in a row – they will mow down everything in their path – first and foremost, the truth.

Hat tip: White House Dossier

Linked by Maggie’s Farm, thanks!

Video: House Foreign Affairs Cmte. Hearing: Benghazi Accountability at the State Department

Today, the House Foreign Affairs Committee called State Department Under Secretary Patrick Kennedy to testify about his agency’s handling of last September’s terrorist attack on the U.S. diplomatic mission in Benghazi, Libya.

Below is Chairman Royce’s opening statement as prepared for delivery at the hearing:

“Since September 11, 2012, the Committee has been focused on the tragedy in Benghazi, Libya, where terrorists killed four Americans that day, including our Ambassador, the first killed in the line of duty since 1979.  The focus of today’s hearing, our fourth, is the troubling lack of accountability we have seen within the State Department since.  The bottom line is that over one year later, no State Department personnel have been held accountable for the Department’s failure to protect the Benghazi consulate, and U.S. personnel.  None.

As we know, there were so many things wrong with the State Department’s decision-making before this fatal attack.  In the face of a glaring need, with violence in Benghazi mounting, critical security requests from the field were denied.  The Department was asleep on 9/11.  This led the Accountability Review Board to find “systemic failures and leadership and management deficiencies at senior levels within two [State Department] bureaus.”  But no State Department personnel have been fired, or even disciplined.  No one has missed a paycheck.  

Accountability can be painful.  Those making bad decisions may have long and otherwise good records.  But the Department can’t have a culture of accountability, which is what any well-functioning organization needs, and which is essential to protecting its personnel, if no one is held accountable for the mismanagement and poor leadership the ARB identified. 

Committee Chairman Ed Royce (R-CA) called for changes in the ARB that would make it a truly independent board.

But Kennedy disputed Royce’s contention that the board was biased in favor of the State Department, arguing that they were as professional a group as could be found.

Royce found that hard to believe since no one had been held accountable.

Kennedy lamely argued that four employees had been relieved of senior positions and reassigned to different positions, to which Royce countered – “no one has missed a paycheck…”

“Reassignments just don’t cut it”, he said.

Video: Whistleblower Lawyer Victoria Toensing Demands Apology From Sec of State Kerry For State Dept. Smears

Washington power couple Victoria Toensing and her husband Joseph diGenova are representing Benghazi witnesses who will testify next week at the House Oversight and Reform hearing.

Toensing has been claiming all week that access to her client was being inhibited by pressure from unidentified administration officials.  On Fox News, Mr. diGenova claimed that the hurdles he faced amounted to a “cover-up” and that the Accountability Review Board had failed to interview key witnesses for its report.

However, a source at the  State Department told the Washington Times that “the board already interviewed 100 witnesses, including all the CIA and State Department personnel involved in the defense of the diplomatic post and of the secret CIA base known as the annex a few miles away.”

Mrs. Toensing also told Fox News on Monday that she had been refused a clearance to represent a Benghazi whistleblower she said was a career Foreign Service officer.

The State Department replied Wednesday that it had not received any such requests for a security clearance.

That tale took another twist Thursday with department spokesman Patrick Ventrell accusing Mrs. Toensing of “lying.”

Since the State Department issued its denial, he said, Mrs. Toensing “has been in contact with us and is now going through the procedures to get a security clearance. But this individual was on TV repeatedly saying that they were being held back from getting a security clearance before they’d even picked up the phone to call us.”

“She was making false statements,” Mr. Ventrell added, “false statements are lying. … We had somebody who was on national television saying that we were blocking them from getting a security clearance, which was not true.”

For the third day in a row, Ms. Toensing declined to grant The Washington Times’ request for an interview.

But she did appear on Fox News, this morning to answer the charge that she’s been lying.

“The American people deserve integrity in government and they’re not getting that with this State Department,”  Toensing began.

“Mr. Ventrell has been making up stuff about me all, week, and attacks my credibility”, she continued. “Here’s what he does, he made up a statement and says I said it, when I never said it and because the statement is false, he says I’m lying.”

Ah- the classic strawman technique so favored by the president.

Toensing demanded that Sec. of State John Kerry apologize for Ventrell’s aspersions.


Weasel Zippers: Benghazi Special Ops Whistleblower: Signal Went Out From Special Ops On Ground For All Available Assets To Assist, No Aid Came

Weasel Zippers: Sharpton: Benghazi Hearings A “Vast Right Wing Conspiracy” Against Hillary Clinton…

State Dept. Accountability Review Board Finds “Systematic Management and Leadership Failures” at the State Dept led to “Grossly” Inadequate Security in Benghazi.

In keeping with how the Obama administration usually handles these types of sticky situations, blame has been shifted, and no disciplinary action has been recommended…

WASHINGTON (AP) – An independent panel charged with investigating the deadly Sept. 11 attack in Libya that killed a U.S. ambassador and three other Americans has concluded that systematic management and leadership failures at the State Department led to “grossly” inadequate security at the mission in Benghazi.

“Systematic failures and leadership and management deficiencies at senior levels within two bureaus of the State Department resulted in a Special Mission security posture that was inadequate for Benghazi and grossly inadequate to deal with the attack that took place,” the panel said.

The report singled out the Bureau of Diplomatic Security and the Bureau of Near East Affairs for criticism, saying there appeared to be a lack of cooperation and confusion over protection at the mission in Benghazi, a city in Eastern Libya that was relatively lawless after the revolution that toppled Libyan strongman Moammar Gadhafi.

Despite those failures, the Accountability Review Board determined that no individual officials ignored or violated their duties and recommended no disciplinary action now. But it also said poor performance by senior managers should be grounds for disciplinary recommendations in the future.


…it confirmed that contrary to initial accounts, there was no protest outside the consulate and said responsibility for the incident rested entirely with the terrorists who attacked the mission. (Duh)


The report also discounted speculation that officials in Washington had refused appeals for addition help after the attack had begun.

“The Board found no evidence of any undue delays in decision making or denial of support from Washington or from the military combatant commanders,” it said. To the contrary, the report said the evacuation of the dead and wounded 12 hours after the initial attack was due to “exceptional U.S. government coordination and military response” that helped save the lives of two seriously wounded Americans.


The report also called on Congress to fully fund the State Department’s security initiatives, noting that budget constraints in the past had led some management officials to emphasize savings over security despite numerous requests from the Benghazi mission and embassy in Tripoli for enhanced protection.

“For many years the State Department has been engaged in a struggle to obtain the resources necessary to carry out its work with varying degrees of success,” it said. This has led to efficiencies but also “had the effect of conditioning a few State Department managers to favor restricting the use of resources as a general orientation.”

It said the number of Diplomatic Security staff in Benghazi before and on the day of the attack “was inadequate despite repeated requests … for additional staffing.”

“The solution requires a more serious and sustained commitment from Congress to support State Department needs, which, in total, constitute a small percentage of the full national budget and that spent for national security,” it said. “Congress must do its part to meet this challenge and provide necessary resources.”


John Bolton, former Ambassador to the UN was on Fox News, Tuesday afternoon to discuss the imminent report with Bill Hemmer. He noted that the Board was appointed by the State Dept itself, in other words,  the people who did the appointing, are the people whose decisions are being questioned. He said that their assertions might not necessarily withstand scrutiny.

Bolton suggested that Hillary avoided scrutiny for two months in order to wait until the report from the Accountability Review Board came out when she could tailor her testimony accordingly.

Here are the predictable answers to the questions Bolton claimed the Accountability Board should have been able to answer:

Q. Why did the State Dept reject continued requests for enhanced security before Sept. 11?

A. The Board found “systematic failures and leadership and management deficiencies at senior levels within two bureaus of the State Department and the “grossly inadequate security” was partially the fault of Congress for not fully funding State Dept. security initiatives.

Q. Could we have done more to protect our people during the attack?

A. The board found support from Washington during the attack to be “exceptional”.

Q. Who came up with this ridiculous story that the whole thing was provoked by the Mohammed video?

A. (This one’s a toughie.) “Contrary to initial accounts, there was no protest outside the consulate and said responsibility for the incident rested entirely with the terrorists who attacked the mission.”

Still no answer on who came up with the ridiculous story.

Congress will hold a hearing on Benghazi, this Thursday.

Previous pertinent entries:

Fox News EXCLUSIVE: CIA Operators Were Denied Request for Help During Benghazi Attack (Video)

October, 26, 2012 — nicedeb

Fox News’ Jennifer Griffen did a masterful job laying it all out:

Fox News has learned from sources who were on the ground in Benghazi that an urgent request from the CIA annex for military back-up during the attack on the U.S. consulate and subsequent attack several hours later was denied by U.S. officials — who also told the CIA operators twice to “stand down” rather than help the ambassador’s team when shots were heard at approximately 9:40 p.m. in Benghazi on Sept. 11.

Former Navy SEAL Tyrone Woods was part of a small team who was at the CIA annex about a mile from the U.S. consulate where Ambassador Chris Stevens and his team came under attack. When he and others heard the shots fired, they informed their higher-ups at the annex to tell them what they were hearing and requested permission to go to the consulate and help out. They were told to “stand down,” according to sources familiar with the exchange. Soon after, they were again told to “stand down.”

Hack-tastic: Jay Carney Ties Republicans to Diplomatic Security Budget Cuts (Video)

October, 12, 2012 — nicedeb

State Dept. Bureaucrat, Charlene Lamb told Congressman Dana Rohrabacher that the budget had nothing to do with security decisions in Benghazi:

Issa Requesting More Info on Benghazi Attack


Although the State Department Accountability Review Board sent its findings and recommendations to Congress back in December, Rep. Darrell Issa and three other House committee chairmen are not satisfied. They’re requesting more information from the State Department about the Sept. 11, 2012, terrorist attack at the U.S.  diplomatic mission in Benghazi.

Issa said,  “Unfortunately, the (review board) did not address some important questions about the attacks in Benghazi, which we believe may contain crucial lessons learned for other U.S. facilities abroad to follow.”

UT San Diego reported:

Issa, Edward Royce and Jason Chaffetz co-wrote a letter Tuesday to Secretary of State Hillary Clinton that asks for the State Department to provide emails, cables and memorandums sent or received by her and several others that pertain to security in Benghazi, a complete list of every individual interviewed by a special review board and video footage of the attack by Feb. 11.

Issa, R-Vista, is the chairman of the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee. Royce, R-Brea, chairs the House Foreign Affairs Committee. Chaffetz, R-Utah, chairs the Oversight and Government Reform’s Subcommittee on National Security.


The letter states the board failed to interview several senior officials at the State Department, including Clinton, and calls it a critical omission of the facts leading up to the attack. The letter also questions why a security support team was withdrawn from Libya.

Good to know that even after Hillary Clinton’s “brilliant” testimony  before the House and Senate, last week, some Republicans are still not ready to drop this.

Select Committee on Benghazi Hearing Live Feed

The House Select Committee on Benghazi is holding its first hearing, titled “Implementation of the Accountability Review Board recommendations.” The hearing began at 10 a.m. Eastern.

Providing testimony are Assistant Secretary of State for Diplomatic Security Gregory Starr, whose position was created after the 2012 attack on the U.S. Consulate in Benghazi, Libya, and two security experts who served on a State Department independent panel.

Live feed via Rollcall:

Here is Chairman Trey Gowdy’s opening statement:

Gowdy’s final comments:


Twitchy: Early Observations from Trey Gowdy’s Benghazi hearing

Hot Air: Benghazi Hearings About To Force The Press To Pay Attention.

NRO: Clinton ‘Correct the Record’ Site Lies About the Record on Benghazi

Fox News Bombshell: Regime Knew Benghazi Was A Terrorist Attack While It Was Happening

In an explosive interview on Fox News’ Special Report, Wednesday, Eric Stahl, a retired major in the U.S. Air Force, told Bret Baier that  U.S. spy agencies were able to hear terrorists making phone calls to their superior commanding officers while the attack on the consulate and CIA annex in Benghazi was taking place on September 11, 2012. The reason the communications were easily intercepted is because the attackers were using State Department cell phones they had seized during the attacks.

It wasn’t weeks, days, or even hours before the “fog of war” had cleared and the Regime could piece together what had happened. They knew in real time - as it was happening – that it was a terrorist attack because they heard the terrorists themselves talking on their own State Dept cellphones.

Eric Stahl, who recently retired as a major in the U.S. Air Force, served as commander and pilot of the C-17 aircraft that was used to transport the corpses of the four casualties from the Benghazi attacks – then-U.S. Ambassador to Libya Chris Stevens, information officer Sean Smith, and former Navy SEALs Glen Doherty and Tyrone Woods – as well as the assault’s survivors from Tripoli to the safety of an American military base in Ramstein, Germany.

In an exclusive interview on Fox News’ “Special Report,” Stahl said members of a CIA-trained Global Response Staff who raced to the scene of the attacks were “confused” by the administration’s repeated implication of the video as a trigger for the attacks, because “they knew during the attack…who was doing the attacking.” Asked how, Stahl told anchor Bret Baier: “Right after they left the consulate in Benghazi and went to the [CIA] safehouse, they were getting reports that cell phones, consulate cell phones, were being used to make calls to the attackers’ higher ups.”

Stahl also told Baier that his crew could have reached Benghazi in time to have played a role in rescuing the victims of the assault, given their alert status and location – but they were never asked to do so.

“You would’ve thought that we would have had a little bit more of an alert posture on 9/11,” Stahl added. “A hurried-up timeline probably would take us [an] hour-and-a-half to get off the ground and three hours and fifteen minutes to get down there. So we could’ve gone down there and gotten them easily.”

What more, Stahl contends that a C 1-30 had been requested a month prior to 9/11 to be on stand-by at the airport, but that request had been denied.

Watch the video – as Major Stahl explains it, you can actually picture these CIA guys looking at each other and going “WTF?” while the Regime was pushing the YouTube video narrative.

Of course, it took nearly two years for anyone to interview any of these guys.

That sham Accountability Review Board, of course, somehow missed them.


I can’t believe Hillary Clinton would even think of  running for president with this FUBAR cover-up on her record. What nerve.

As for Obama… #IMPEACH

Video: Gowdy Accuses Obama Admin of Hiding Benghazi Docs

The Man of the hour, Rep. Trey Gowdy (R-SC) was on Greta Van Susteren, Monday night to talk about the latest revelations in the Benghazi investigation, and  being chosen to Chair the Select Committee.

Gowdy responded to Democrat critics of the probe by saying, “well, Greta, your viewers would still have the same unanswered questions we have… The jury I’m interested in are reasonable, fair-minded people like your viewers. Washington is its own echo-system. They wouldn’t like it if I cured Malaria tonight because I’m a Republican. So, of course, they’re going to be critical.”

He said that some unnamed witnesses have come forward and revealed the Regime has actively attempted to conceal certain documents from Benghazi investigators, including the Accountability Review Board.

Via The Washington Free Beacon: 

“Does anyone really believe the ARB had access to all of the documents and all of the witnesses? I don’t know anyone who believes that. So, necessarily, that undercuts whatever findings they may have found,” he said.

To that point, Gowdy pointed out the ARB relied on summaries of the military’s activity that night and never had an opportunity to interview former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton. Thus, Gowdy contended the ARB could not credibly conclude whether Clinton was aware of the threats facing the Benghazi mission.

The South Carolina Congressman also emphasized it will be critical for the committee to have complete and total access to all available documents, irrespective of whether the administration considers them relevant.  ”I want to see every single solitary relevant material document,” he said. “In fact, I want it see everything for which there can be any argument that it is relevant and then we can judge whether or not it’s material.”

Senator Ted Cruz spoke to Fox News’ Neil Cavuto, Monday, to discuss the White House’s stonewalling on the truth about the Benghazi attacks.

“I think it is unfortunate to see the Democratic Party circling the wagons around President Obama and Hillary Clinton and treating the death by terrorist attack of four Americans as nothing but a political inconvenience,” Cruz said.

“It has been 19 months, almost 20. We have four dead Americans. We have the first dead U.S. Ambassador killed in service since 1979. In the 19 months that have followed, we don’t have a single dead terrorist or a single terrorist apprehended, and what we have seen from the President and Senate Democrats has been stonewalling,” Sen. Cruz said.

Sen. Cruz outlined four basic questions to which Americans deserve answers:

  1. Why did the State Department repeatedly refuse to provide additional security as was requested by personnel on the ground?
  2. Why did we not have military assets in place to protect our men and women on the anniversary of September 11th when there was increased terrorist activity in the region?
  3.  During the attack, why didn’t we send in forces to protect those men?
  4. In the 19 months that have followed, why has no one been apprehended, and no one been brought to justice?

Sen. Cruz continued, “You and I both remember the presidential debate on foreign policy when President Obama said no one is more upset about what happened in Benghazi than I am…. If he were speaking the truth, if he cared about it, you would think that wouldn’t be the last time he mentioned it.”

“I’ve been calling for a Joint Select Committee for over a year now, and in fact I’ve introduced a resolution in the Senate that has 24 Senate cosponsors calling for a Joint Select Committee, and I understand the Democrats like to pretend it’s tit-for-tat.

“The truth shouldn’t be partisan. Finding out what happened, finding out how we could have prevented it, and acting to actually apprehend these guys, should not be partisan.”

Jay Carney: White House Talking Points Were Not About Benghazi (Video)

White House Press Secretary Jay Carney was spinning like a top at today’s press conference.

Obviously expecting to be asked about the new WH Benghazi emails produced by Judicial Watch, he had some brand new shiny spin for the Praetorians to use in defense of the Regime. And he recited the brand new spin with the bored air of someone who has patiently explained it to the duller reporters (like Jonathan Karl)  “again and again.”

Karl wanted to know why the email was withheld for 20 months. “This is directly relevant, he said.  “Why did you hold it back. Why did it take a court case for you to release this?”

“Jon,” an annoyed Carney answered.  “I have said again and again, and I know you can keep asking me again and again. This document was not about Benghazi.”

Talk about moving the goalposts.

“It was her prep for the Sunday shows!”  Karl exclaimed.

“It wasn’t her only prep for Benghazi,” Carney patiently explained. “She relied for answers on Benghazi on the document prepared by the CIA, as did members of Congress.”

He continued in that vein, refusing to answer the actual question, which was – why was the email withheld?

Watch it and weep for our country:

Needless to say to anyone who saw Susan Rice’s performances on those Sunday talk shows – she applied the YouTube video narrative to the Benghazi attack, repeatedly. So if it was some kind of gross misunderstanding, why was she given a promotion, rather than be fired for getting it all so profoundly wrong?

I didn’t watch the whole press conference, so I don’t know if anyone called Carney out on his past lies:

“It has been repeatedly said by some of the critics on this issue on the Hill that the White House provided talking points. That has been categorically refuted not just by us but by the intelligence community, and yet it’s still periodically said on the air. And it’s just wrong,” Carney lied in November of 2012.

In May of 2013, Carney lied, “the White House involvement in any changes that were made to the so-called talking points were extremely minimal and non-substantive.”

Now he’s reduced to ignoring questions about why it took so long to produce the email with the White House talking points, the existence of which he claimed, were “categorically refuted.”


Washington Free Beacon has a longer clip of Karl’s questioning: Jon Karl vs. Jay Carney on Benghazi – 8 Minutes of Fury:

In an effort to spin the situation, Jay Carney claimed the talking points provided to Rice were about the numerous protests occurring in the Middle East and weren’t specifically about Benghazi.

“If you look at that document, that document that we’re talking about today was about the overall environment in the Muslim world — the protests outside of Khartoum — the embassy in Khartoum, outside of the embassy in Tunis, the protests outside of the embassy in Cairo. These were big stories. These were — this was a big problem. And this was an ongoing story through that weekend when Ambassador Rice appeared in the Sunday shows. So to suggest that we wouldn’t have answers to questions about those situations –and unless you’re telling me now that those protests didn’t have anything to do with the video, it was entirely appropriate to have a question-an-answer document prepared for the video,” Carney said in defense of the released emails.

“It did not come from the CIA. You stood there at the podium time after time and said that she was referring to talking points created by the CIA. Now we see a document that comes from the White House, not from the CIA, attributing the protests to the video, and we have the former director of the CIA saying that that was not something that his analysts had attributed it to,” Karl fired back.

The Conversation: Carney Knew The WH Document Was About Benghazi – He Used The Talking Points Himself on Sept. 14, 2012:

“Spin” is a generous euphemism for the disgraceful deceptions this “public servant” spouts on a daily basis. Never forget – the White House Press Secretary works for the American people. He owes us the truth – and we are not getting it from him.

According to Judicial Watch, the Rhodes email was sent on sent on Friday, September 14, 2012, at 8:09 p.m. with the subject line:  “RE: PREP CALL with Susan, Saturday at 4:00 pm ET.”

Ace of Spades HQ: In an Administration of Lying Incompetents, Jay Carney Manages to Distinguish Himself Yet Again:

Exit Quote: “If you look at the document in question, it is not about Benghazi.

Second Exit Quote: “The currently available information suggests that the demonstrations in Benghazi were spontaneously inspired by the protests at the US Embassy in Cairo and evolved into a direct assault against the US consulate and subsequently its annex.

Third Exit Quote: After a year and a half of vigorously insisting the White House had no input into these Talking Points — that all information came from the CIA and FBI — Carney now says “obviously” the White House had input into the Talking Points.

Previously –

In May of 2013, I took the time to review Jay Carney’s dishonest spin on Benghazi.

After Months of Dishonest Spinning on Benghazi, Jay Carney Clings to ARB Report (Video)

On September 14, Jake Tapper asked Carney if the anniversary of September 11 might have been a good time to have extra security around diplomat and military posts.

After assuring us that they are always very vigilant on anniversaries like 9/11 (no they’re not), Jay said, but “let’s be clear….these protests were in reaction to a VIDEO that had spread to the region….”

Jake: “In Benghazi?”

Jay: “We don’t know otherwise. We have no information to suggest that it was a preplanned attack.” (Yes they had) “The unrest we’ve seen around the region has been in reaction to a video that many Muslims find offensive, and while the violence is reprehensible and unjustified it is not a reaction to 9/11 or US policy.”

Jay was being a good soldier – literally reciting  the White House talking points supplied to him by White House fixer, Ben Rhodes:  “it is not a reaction to 9/11 or US policy.”

Jay Carney on Sept. 19, argued that they didn’t have evidence that it was a pre-planned attack. “Bad actors” had come on the scene of a protest armed with RPGs and mortars. “We prefer to have an investigation…”

The reporter, clearly not buying it, said, “so a random crowd that had come together with their heavy weapons – got insulted by the film, and decided to – you know – blow up…”

Carney doubled down with, “there has certainly been precedent in the past where bad actors  –  extremists who are heavily armed who have exploited situations that have developed in order to attack Americans…”

This is the 19th of September now, mind you, and he’s refusing to admit the obvious because that would reflect badly on the regime.



Jay Carney October 10, 2012: Benghazi Terror Attack: Jake Tapper Presses Jay Carney on WH Misstatements on Consulate Attack:

Note how everything that they knew the night of the attack was “still under investigation”. Note also how much faith Carney was putting into the Regime’s ringer “Accountability Review Board” that was looking into the attacks.

“Given the fact, that so much was made of the video, that apparently had absolutely nothing to do with Benghazi, there wasn’t even a protest, didn’t President Obama shoot from the hip?” Jake Tapper asked.

Carney responded that it was a moving picture, and some people were trying to politicize a situation that shouldn’t be politicized.

“There was a lot of talk about the video….” Jake persisted.


Dec. 20, Carney Gets Testy Over Benghazi Questions:

Here, Carney took a question from Fox News’ Ed Henry, and got huffy at the idea that anyone higher up than a few low level State Department flacks  should be held responsible. “What are you suggesting, Ed, Carney demanded, the disgust and contempt dripping from his voice. Based on the holy Gospel according to the ACB report, some reporting turned out to bewrong, Carney sneered, clearly alluding to Fox News.



It’s Hillary’s Turn For The Woodshed On Justice With Jeanine Pirro (Video)

In this week’s opening statement of Justice with  Jeanne Pirro, the Judge took former Sec. of State Hillary Clinton to the woodshed, (and how) calling her conduct in the Benghazi affair, “a gross deviation from the standard of care that any reasonable Secretary of State would observe.”

“You knew it!” Pirro blasted.  “That’s why you didn’t go on the Sunday Shows!

You knew it! Which is why you waited until everyone else had spoken so you could get your ducks in a row.

You knew t because of the cables from your friend and the deteriorating security situation in Benghazi.

You knew it! which is why you appointed your friends to an Accountability Review Board – which never even called you to testify!

You knew it! Which is why no one was ever fired in your department.

You knew it! Which is why only one who suffered consequences was the whistleblower who who went against your dictates.”

“So which is it?” Pirro purred. “If you didn’t know, you’re incompetent, if you did know, you’re guilty of criminal negligence. People though, are so afraid of you that your name isn’t even mentioned in the review by the Senate Intelligence Committee.”

“What happened in Benghazi was preventable. You had a duty and a responsibility and they relied on you. They ASKED you for safety and security, and you not only breached that duty, but you breached the public trust we have in our government. “

The judge concluded sagely that even though Hillary and her boss may not face consequences now, “Justice is about accountability and consequences, The facts have now been told, and the consequences have yet to be determined – and in the meantime, we continue to wait for justice.”

Pirro had on former Asst. Sec. of Defense, KT McFarland to talk about the Senate report.

Judge Jeanine Pirro – Benghazi Terror Attack Lawmakers Continue To Demand Answers From Obama Admin:

Judge Jeanine Pirro – Benghazi Terror Attack Lawmakers Continue To Demand Answers From Obama Admin:

“Let me make something very clear”, said former SEAL Christopher Mark Hebon. “Nobody who wears a SEALs trident on their chest…is a fan of Obama – nobody s a fan of Hillary Clinton, period.. Those four men who were killed in Benghazi should be getting the Congressional Gold Medal right now.”


Friday Free For All: “The Biggest Lie Ever Told By A Sitting President”

sk110113dAPR20131101014517Steve Kelly cartoon via Townhall

Charles Krauthammer: Obamacare laid bare:

Every disaster has its moment of clarity. Physicist Richard Feynman dunks an O-ring into ice water and everyone understands instantly why the shuttle Challenger exploded. This week, the Obamacare O-ring froze for all the world to see: Hundreds of thousands of cancellation letters went out to people who had been assured a dozen times by the president that “If you like your health-care plan, you’ll be able to keep your health-care plan. Period.”

The cancellations lay bare three pillars of Obamacare: (a) mendacity, (b) paternalism and (c) subterfuge.

(a) Those letters are irrefutable evidence that President Obama’s repeated you-keep-your-coverage claim was false. Why were they sent out? Because Obamacare renders illegal (with exceedingly narrow “grandfathered” exceptions) the continuation of any insurance plan deemed by Washington regulators not to meet their arbitrary standards for adequacy. Example: No maternity care? You are terminated.

So a law designed to cover the uninsured is now throwing far more people off their insurance than it can possibly be signing up on the nonfunctioning insurance exchanges. Indeed, most of the 19 million people with individual insurance will have to find new and likely more expensive coverage. And that doesn’t even include the additional millions who are sure to lose their employer-provided coverage. That’s a lot of people. That’s a pretty big lie.

Gateway Pundit: Limbaugh Calls Obama’s Lie About “Keeping Your Insurance” Perhaps “The Biggest Lie Ever Told by a Sitting President.”

Obama officials in 2010 knew that up to 93 million Americans would be unable to keep their health insurance plans under Obamacare. That means roughly one of three Americans will lose their insurance thanks to Obamacare.

Today Rush Limbaugh told his audience,
“Obama’s lie about keeping your insurance may be the biggest lie ever told by a sitting president.”

Fox Nation: Rush: Nixon Resigned Over A Lie Nowhere Near As Big As ObamaCare:

It is “total 100% fraud.”

WASHINGTON — A tech firm linked to a campaign-donor crony of President Obama not only got the job to help build the federal health-insurance Web site — but also is getting paid to fix it.

Anthony Welters, a top campaign bundler for Obama and frequent White House guest, is the executive vice president of UnitedHealth Group, which owns the software company now at the center of the ObamaCare Web-site fiasco.

UnitedHealth Group subsidiary Quality Software Services Inc. (QSSI), which built the data hub for the ObamaCare system, has been named the new general contractor in charge of repairing the glitch-plagued

Welters and his wife, Beatrice, have shoveled piles of cash into Obama’s campaign coffers and ­apparently reaped the rewards.

Welters and wife Beatrice are also frequent guests at the White House.
Looks like after 5 years, AP has finally had it with Obama’s B.S. –
Julie Roginsky was on Hannity’s radio show earlier today with Dan Bongino to discuss the president’s health care lies. After spinning hard to keep from saying the president lied, she attacked Bongino saying he didn’t want others to have the same great insurance he had when he worked as a secret service agent. Bongino fired right back telling her to ‘cut the crap’ and said how tired he is of ‘big government liberal hacks’ telling him he doesn’t want people to have insurance.
bam pix

The White House almost never allows real photojournalists to photograph President Obama performing his duties in the Oval Office.  Instead, the White House routinely issues staged press photos (like the one above) for news outlets to reprint and broadcast.

The AP is now calling on news editors to stop using the staged photos, calling the practice “propaganda.”

from DC:

Editors of The Associated Press condemned the White House’s refusal to give photojournalists real access to President Obama, who prefers to circulate press release-style pictures taken by his own paid photographers.

These official photographs are little more than propaganda, according to AP director of photography Santiago Lyon.

The AP has only been permitted to photograph the president alone in the Oval Office on two occasions–both in his first term–and has never been allowed to photograph the president with his staff in the office. The AP generally receives access when foreign leaders are visiting, but at other times the White House relies on its own photographers to take pictures and distribute them to the press.

Investors Business Daily: Obama’s Military Coup Purges 197 Officers In Five Years:

What the president calls “my military” is being cleansed of any officer suspected of disloyalty to or disagreement with the administration on matters of policy or force structure, leaving the compliant and fearful.We recognize President Obama is the commander-in-chief and that throughout history presidents from Lincoln to Truman have seen fit to remove military commanders they view as inadequate or insubordinate. Turnover in the military ranks is normal, and in these times of sequestration and budget cuts the numbers are expected to tick up as force levels shrink and missions change.

Yet what has happened to our officer corps since President Obama took office is viewed in many quarters as unprecedented, baffling and even harmful to our national security posture. We have commented on some of the higher profile cases, such as Gen. Carter Ham. He was relieved as head of U.S. Africa Command after only a year and a half because he disagreed with orders not to mount a rescue mission in response to the Sept. 11, 2012, attack in Benghazi.

Rear Adm. Chuck Gaouette, commander of the John C. Stennis Carrier Strike Group, was relieved in October 2012 for disobeying orders when he sent his group on Sept. 11 to “assist and provide intelligence for” military forces ordered into action by Gen. Ham.

Other removals include the sacking of two nuclear commanders in a single week — Maj. Gen. Michael Carey, head of the 20th Air Force, responsible for the three wings that maintain control of the 450 intercontinental ballistic missiles, and Vice Adm. Tim Giardina, the No. 2 officer at U.S. Strategic Command.

Gateway Pundit: Obama Continues to Purge Military of Top Generals:

Retired generals and current commanders who have spoken to TheBlaze believe that political ideology is the primary impetus behind the effort.
World Net Daily reported:

Retired Army Maj. Gen. Patrick Brady, recipient of the U.S. military’s highest decoration, the Medal of Honor, as well as other top retired officers, say President Obama’s agenda is decimating the morale of the U.S. ranks to the point members no longer feel prepared to fight or have the desire to win.

“There is no doubt he (Obama) is intent on emasculating the military and will fire anyone who disagrees with him” over such issues as “homosexuals, women in foxholes, the Obama sequester,” Brady told WND.

“They are purging everyone, and if you want to keep your job, just keep your mouth shut,” one source told WND.

Not only are military service members being demoralized and the ranks’ overall readiness being reduced by the Obama administration’s purge of key leaders, colonels – those lined up in rank to replace outgoing generals – are quietly taking their careers in other directions.

Todd Starnes, Fox News: Pentagon training manual: white males have unfair advantages:

A controversial 600-plus page manual used by the military to train its Equal Opportunity officers teaches that “healthy, white, heterosexual, Christian” men hold an unfair advantage over other races, and warns in great detail about a so-called “White Male Club.”

“Simply put, a healthy, white, heterosexual, Christian male receives many unearned advantages of social privilege, whereas a black, homosexual, atheist female in poor health receives many unearned disadvantages of social privilege,” reads a statement in the manual created by the Defense Equal Opportunity Management Institute (DEOMI).

The manual, which was obtained by Fox News, also instructs troops to “support the leadership of people of color. Do this consistently, but not uncritically,” the manual states.

Who would ever have expected such a thing in ObamAmerica?

The Equal Opportunity Advisor Student Guide is the textbook used during a three month DEOMI course taught at Patrick Air Force Base in Florida. Individuals who attend the training lead Equal Opportunity briefings on military installations around the nation.

The 637-page manual covers a wide range of issues from racism and religious diversity to cultural awareness, extremism and white privilege.

I obtained a copy of the manual from an Equal Opportunity officer who was disturbed by the course content and furious over the DEOMI’s reliance on the Southern Poverty Law Center for information on “extremist” groups.

“I’m participating in teaching things that are not true,” the instructor told me. He asked not to be identified because he feared reprisals.

“I should not be in a position to do that,” he said. “It violates Constitutional principles, but it also violates my conscience. And I’m not going to do it – not going to do it.”

Update to this story.

Via Daily Caller:

President Barack Obama has given the nation a new “Council on Climate Preparedness and Resilience” that expands government bureaucrats’ role in how Americans use their lands, energy, waters and property.

Obama announced the executive order Friday, the day after Halloween.

The order is titled “Preparing the United States for the Impacts of Climate Change.” [...]

The council is officially intended “to prepare the Nation for the impacts of climate change by undertaking actions to enhance climate preparedness and resilience.”

Has anyone had the heart to tell him that Global Warming is a hoax built on junk science, yet?

The influential D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals on Friday sided with an Ohio business that challenged Obamacare’s birth control mandate. The business owners—two brothers who own and operate Freshway Foods and Freshway Logistics in Sidney, Ohio—argued that providing such coverage would violate their Catholic beliefs. The appeals court panel ruled in their favor (via

“The burden on religious exercise does not occur at the point of contraceptive purchase; instead, it occurs when a company’s owners fill the basket of goods and services that constitute a healthcare plan,” Judge Janice Rogers Brown wrote on behalf of the court.

“They can either abide by the sacred tenets of their faith, pay a penalty of over $14 million, and cripple the companies they have spent a lifetime building, or they become complicit in a grave moral wrong,” Brown wrote.

It is one of the most important battles raging in Washington, a fight that will have far-reaching consequences for everything from health care and the regulatory state to gun rights and the war on terrorism. Yet most Americans have heard nothing about it.

I’m talking about Democratic efforts to pack the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit.

America has 13 different federal appellate courts, but the D.C. Circuit stands out as the most powerful, especially on regulatory and constitutional matters. No other appellate court wields so much influence over hot-button national issues.

The D.C. Circuit currently has eight active judges and six senior judges (who are semi-retired). Based on its caseload, the court does not need more judges at the present time. For example: Between 2005 and 2013, its total number of written decisions per active judge declined by 27 percent, and the number of appeals filed with the court fell by 18 percent. The D.C. Circuit has already taken four months off this year. Meanwhile, other federal appellate courts genuinely are overburdened and do need more judges.

And yet, instead of trying to fill judicial vacancies where the need is most urgent, President Obama and Senate Democrats are attempting to transform the D.C. Circuit into a rubber stamp for liberalism and big government.

Here is the quote cited by Issa and Royce, via

“About 30 minutes into the attack, a quick reaction force from the CIA Annex ignored orders to wait and raced to the compound, at times running and shooting their way through the streets just to get there.” {emphasis ours}

The logical, next question is simple. Assuming Logan’s sources are credible, who ordered the men from the Annex to wait? Here is a short clip that includes the quote above but also State Department whistleblower Gregory Hicks, who attempted several times to get additional security before the attack occurred.


With that fresh in your mind, we take you to page 23 of the Accountability Review Board’s UNCLASSIFIED Report:

“The departure of the Annex team was not delayed by orders from superiors; the team leader decided on his own to depart the Annex compound once it was apparent, despite a brief delay to permit their continuing efforts…” {emphasis ours}

So, who is lying, Lara Logan or the ARB Chairmen, Thomas Pickering and Adm. Mike Mullen? One must be because these assertions are at direct odds with one another.

The Daily Caller:  FCC to police news media, question reporters in wide-ranging content survey:

The Federal Communications Commission is planning a broad probe of political speech across media platforms, an unprecedented move that raises serious First Amendment concerns.

The FCC’s proposed “Multi-Market Study of Critical Information Needs,” which is set to begin a field test in a single market with an eye toward a comprehensive study in 2014, would collect a remarkably wide range of information on demographics, point of view, news topic selection, management style and other factors in news organizations both in and out of the FCC’s traditional purview.

The airwaves regulator would also subject news producers in all media to invasive questioning about their work and content.

Ranking SEAL commanders recently banned the Navy Jack from SEAL uniforms.
The Daily Caller reported:

The Navy Jack is the ‘don’t tread on me’ flag, one that has earned a revered place in America’s naval history and a beloved place in sailor’s hearts, through its use for over two centuries. This symbol of America’s naval ferocity has spanned our country’s entire existence, flying from the masts of the Continental Navy during the war of independence, to today’s War on Terror. In fact, an amendment to the Navy code called SECNAV Instruction 10520.6 clearly states that as of 31 May 2002 all ships are to fly the flag throughout the duration of the War on Terror.

BenghaziGate: Brennan Allows Survivors To Talk To Congress, Issa Announces New Hearing (Video)


Republican lawmakers have been trying nearly a year to get to the bottom of what went wrong in Benghazi. After being stonewalled for months by a State Department unwilling to make Benghazi witnesses available, they are finally having some luck with the CIA.

Fox News reported:

CIA Director John Brennan now says his agency will make survivors of the Benghazi attack available to talk to lawmakers, in a possible breakthrough for members of Congress investigating the strike.


Brennan made his comments in a three-page response to a letter sent to him by House Intelligence Committee Chairman Mike Rogers.


The Sept. 3 letter comes as five separate House committees are investigating the attack and demanding why no one has been held responsible or brought to justice.


“You cannot have an attack on the mission, 12 months later identified a good number of the participants, and have absolutely no consequences for the taking of American lives,” Rogers said.


Brennan’s comments were in response to an Aug. 2 letter from Rogers who asked  the head of the CIA a series of question on Benghazi including whether survivors were told not to come forward and share their first-hand account of what happened that bloody night in Libya.


“To the best of my knowledge after inquiry, I am unaware of any such officer who has been threatened with reprisals,” Brennan wrote. “Information identifying those officers is classified. We will work with the Committee to provide the relevant information via classified channels.


Chairman of the House Oversight and Reform Committee announced a full committee hearing on Benghazi to be held, next week with the leaders of the Accountability Review Board that investigated the Benghazi attack.

“Reviews of the Benghazi Attacks and Unanswered Questions”

Sept. 19, 9:30 am. In 2154 Rayburn House Office Building

Ambassador Thomas R. Pickering

Chairman, Benghazi Accountability Review Board

Admiral Michael G. Mullen, USN (Ret.)

Vice-Chairman, Benghazi Accountability Review Board

Mark J. Sullivan

Chairman, Independent Panel on Best Practices

Former Director, United States Secret Service

Todd Keil

Member, Independent Panel on Best Practices

Former Asst. Secretary for Infrastructure Protection

U.S. Department of Homeland Security

 Family members of Americans lost in the Benghazi attack 

Chaffetz Chastises Regime On Benghazi: If CNN can interview suspect in Benghazi attack, why can’t FBI?

On the heels of CNN reporter  Arwa Damon’s exclusive interview with Ahmed Abu Khattala, a ‘lead suspect’ in the Benghazi attack, Rep Jason Chaffetz appeared on CNN to discuss his call for the FBI to get more aggressive on the Benghazi investigation.

“Our people aren’t even talking to him, let alone capturing him or killing him, if it’s appropriate”, Chaffetz said,  “I just don’t understand…”


Via House Oversight And Reform Press Release: Seven Months Later, State Department Still Hesitating to Make Final Determinations on Employees Faulted by ARB:

WASHINGTON – House Oversight and Government Reform Committee Chairman Darrell Issa (R-Calif.) today asked the State Department to explain why the agency is still struggling to make status decisions on four employees faulted for their conduct by the Benghazi Accountability Review Board (ARB). More than seven months after those officials were faulted by the ARB, those individuals remain on paid administrative leave. In his letter to Secretary John Kerry requesting a briefing, Chairman Issa expresses concern about why the State Department continues to hesitate on making decisions on the future of the four employees faulted by the ARB.  Absent internal doubts about the strength of the ARB’s conclusions, concerns about how information from ongoing investigations into the Benghazi attacks may yet alter determination, or any reservations about granting faulted individuals a forum to rebut accusations, the Department’s continued delay of final determinations about the employment status of the four individuals faulted by the ARB remains puzzling.

Chairman Issa states in the letter: “The Committee has certainly taken notice that while the Department hesitates to reach final determinations on the status of the four officials identified by the ARB, other officials with similar degrees of responsibility for security in Benghazi and the Department’s flawed response to the attacks have been promoted.  For example, Elizabeth Dibble was promoted to be the Deputy Chief of Mission in London.  Victoria Nuland was promoted to be the Assistant Secretary for the Bureau of European Affairs. These promotions—which occurred while the employment status of the officials faulted by the ARB remains in limbo—create the appearance that former Secretary Hillary Clinton’s decision to announce action against the individuals named in the ARB report was more of a public relations strategy than a measured response to a tragedy. “

The letter requests that the State Department provide a briefing on why it continues to delay final decisions on the four employees placed on paid Administrative leave and why they were initially told that their leave would only be temporary before they were given new assignments.

Read the letter to Kerry here.

Linked by Doug Ross, thanks!

Latest on BenghaziGate – Gen. Ham Bombshell + Not-So-Retired Marine Commander Will Testify Before Congress

Drip, drip, drip….

The General who was in charge of AFRICOM on the night of the Benghazi attack has gone on the record to say that it was clear that it was terrorism almost immediately.

Fox News reports:

A senior United States military commander at the time of the Benghazi, Libya attack has come forward with firsthand knowledge to say it was clear from the beginning that it had nothing to do with an anti-Islamic video.

Retired General Carter Ham, the former head of U.S. forces in Africa, told the Aspen Security Forum that he was in Washington, D.C. for a routine meeting with Defense Secretary Leon Panetta when an alert came in from commanders in Germany that a violent assault was underway in Benghazi and Ambassador Chris Stevens was missing.

Amb. Stevens and three others were killed during that September 11, 2012 attack on the U.S. consulate in Benghazi. In the weeks after, the Obama administration shifted blame onto an anti-Islamic video.

Gen. Ham said on Friday that within hours after the attack, it became clearer that it was not a demonstration and could be a terrorist attack.

Sharyl Attkisson of CBS News reported on July 5th that the Pentagon would not divulge the whereabouts of Marine Corps. Col. George Bristol because he had retired, and Congress “cannot compel retired members to testify before Congress.”   Republicans in Congress have been eager to talk to Bristol because it is thought that he has valuable information about what happened in Benghazi.

Bristol, a martial arts master, was commander of Joint Special Operations Task Force-Trans Sahara based in Stuttgart, Germany until he retired last March. In an article in Stars and Stripes, Bristol is quoted at his retirement ceremony as telling his troops that “an evil” has descended on Africa, referring to Islamic militant groups. “It is on us to stomp it out.”

Members of Congress in both the House and Senate, including Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., have asked the Pentagon for assistance in locating Bristol so that they can question him about events the night of the terrorist attacks in Benghazi. But those efforts have come up empty.

“The Department of Defense has been entirely forthcoming on all matters related to our response to the attacks in Benghazi from the outset,” said Pentagon spokesman Firman. He added that “any congressional committee can call the witnesses it needs” through subpoena, if necessary.

On June 26, the House Armed Services Committee questioned other military members in the AFRICOM chain of command in a closed hearing. The witnesses included Bristol’s former superiors: commander of Special Operations Command Africa Rear Adm. Brian Losey and former AFRICOM commander Gen. Carter Ham.

The Marine Corps. Times reported on July 17, that  Bristol isn’t retired.

Defense Department officials have told members of Congress that Bristol cannot be forced to testify because he retired after stepping down during a March change of command ceremony, according to several media reports. The Pentagon reinforced that point of view to Marine Corps Times on Tuesday.

“Col. Bristol was not invited by Congress to testify before he retired,” said Air Force Maj. Robert Firman, a spokesman with the Office of the Secretary of Defense. “The DoD has cooperated fully with Congress and the Accountability Review Board since the beginning of this investigation, and we will continue to do so.”

That isn’t the case, however. While Bristol is preparing for retirement, he is on active duty through the end of July, said Maj. Shawn Haney, a Marine spokeswoman, on Wednesday. He will be placed on the inactive list on Aug. 1, she said. That contradicts statements that Pentagon officials have issued to both Congress and the media.

The Pentagon changed its tune, Monday, saying that  Bristol will now talk to members of Congress.

The announcement follows at least two requests by South Carolina Republican Sen. Lindsey Graham for Bristol’s full account of the September 11, 2012, attacks.

It was not immediately clear if Bristol will talk in public or behind closed doors.

Pentagon spokesman Maj. Rob Firman told Fox News on Monday a Defense Department misunderstanding about when Bristol retired resulted in Graham’s first request being rejected.

Rep. Frank Wolf (R-VA) vowed last week, to go to the House floor every day until the August recess with a new question about Benghazi.

Today’s question: “Why was the CIA’s security team repeatedly ordered to ‘stand down’ for more than 30 minutes after the attack began?”

The CIA “repeatedly blocked” the departure of a security team that was ready “within minutes” to respond to the Sept. 11, 2012, terror attacks in Benghazi, Libya that claimed the lives of four Americans, according to Rep. Frank Wolf (R., Va.)

Wolf revealed on the House floor on Monday that “trusted sources have confirmed” to his office “that the security team was ready to respond within minutes after receiving the initial call for help, but the CIA repeatedly blocked their departure for more than 30 minutes.”

Meanwhile, an under-reported story at the Washington Times details how  deeply involved the White House was in scrubbing the accuracy out of the Benghazi ‘talking points’, based on newly revealed emails.

As the hour grew late on the night of Sept. 14, the White House wanted to make one thing clear to the State Department and the CIA as the three collaborated on what would come to be known as the Benghazi “talking points,” designed to be used by Congress and administration officials to explain what had happened three days earlier at the U.S. diplomatic mission in Benghazi, Libya.

The attack, which killed Ambassador J. Christopher Stevens and three other Americans, was not planned, White House National Security Council spokesman Tommy Vietor wrote in an 8:54 p.m. email.


The initial talking points ran six paragraphs long and said the crowd was a mix of individuals, but “that being said, we do know that Islamic extremists with ties to al-Qaida participated in the attack.” The talking points went on to recount attacks against other countries’ diplomatic missions in Benghazi and raised the prospect that the U.S. facilities were “previously surveilled” in anticipation of the attack.

By the time the talking points were approved a day later, they had been reduced to three paragraphs and any hint of terrorists or planning had been scrubbed. The final version said the attack was the culmination of “demonstrations” that were “spontaneously inspired” by protests at the U.S. Embassy in Cairo earlier Sept. 11, though it did acknowledge “indications that extremists participated in the violent demonstrations.”

Some Washington pundits think that Benghazi is the most damning of all the Obama scandals.

Jeff Kuhner thinks “Benghazi may turn out to be President Obama’s Watergate.”

The scandal is a growing cancer on the administration, threatening its very existence. The more information comes out, the more damning it is. This is why Democrats — and their media allies — are desperately trying to sweep the truth under the rug. Mr. Obama’s political survival is at stake.

Joseph Curl says Benghazi is the Only Scandal That Matters.

White House: Bob Woodward, who knows a thing or two about scandals and cover-ups, isn’t falling for the double head fake.

“If you read through all these emails,” the Watergate reporter said, “you see that everyone in the government is saying, ‘Oh, let’s not tell the public that terrorists were involved, people connected to al Qaeda. Let’s not tell the public that there were warnings.’ I have to go back 40 years to Watergate when Nixon put out his edited transcripts to the conversations, and he personally went through them and said, ‘Oh, let’s not tell this, let’s not show this.’”

“I would not dismiss Benghazi.”

Too bad, Bob. Washington’s press corps already has.

We need to keep that faucet dripping if for no other reason than to watch the Regime’s  lapdogs embarrass themselves trying to defend their Master.

“There’s no there there!” They simper.

Yeah right….

Linked by iOWNTHEWORLD, thanks!

Monday Morning Catch-up: Kill The Gang of 8 Bill


Ted Cruz, Red State: Latest “Deal” from the Senate: Pass Amnesty First, Read the Bill Later:

On Monday at 5:30pm, the United States Senate will vote on the most sweeping immigration reform proposal it has considered in almost 3 decades – and it will do so having only seen the nearly 1200 pages of text for approximately 72 hours.  Americans – including myself, my fellow senators and our staffs – are still trying to figure out exactly what is in the new Schumer-Corker-Hoeven “deal.”

Sound familiar?  Pass it to find out what’s in it?  Reminiscent of Obamacare, the lengthy amendment to replace the Gang of 8’s original bill was crafted behind closed doors and introduced late on Friday, after many members had left town.  In the 2007 immigration debate, close to 50 amendments were considered.  But this year, we have only debated 9 – with some of us being completely shut out.

Given only a weekend to review the language, we will now vote on whether to end a debate that never really began.   To be clear – this is not a difficult vote.   On process alone, we should all vote “no.“  This was by design – the President, Harry Reid and the Gang of 8 preferred all along to ram through a “deal,” and not have a real debate – just like Obamacare.  Worse, just like Obamacare, the “deal” involved lots of horse-trading and buying off of votes at the last minute – a display of everything that is wrong with Washington, and one of the things I specifically campaigned against.

But, on substance – the vote is even easier.   There are too many troubling provisions of the bill to list, such as de facto affirmative action hiring for current illegal immigrants due to Obamacare and huge amounts of discretion for the DHS Secretary to waive deportation and inadmissibility.   And for all the talk, the new Schumer-Corker-Hoeven “deal” is nothing new at all.  It’s the same amnesty-before-false-promise-of-security of the Gang of 8 and the bills of debates past.

That is why we started this petition, so that Americans can speak out and let Senators know that they oppose the legalization-first bill offered by the Gang of 8 and Schumer-Corker-Hoeven.

Finish reading at the link…

Jed Graham, IBD: WaPo’s ‘Fact Check’ Falsely Slams Sen. Cruz (And Me) On Immigration:

In a post awarding Sen. Ted Cruz three Pinocchios, Washington Post fact checker Glenn Kessler broke the first two rules of fact checking:

1. Think before you call someone a liar.

2. Don’t level an attack on someone’s veracity because you doubt his sincerity or question his motives.

Here is the tweet from Cruz that led Kessler to go on the attack:

“If Gang of 8 bill passes, those newly legalized are exempted from ObamaCare. HUGE incentive for employers to hire them instead of Americans.”

Kessler, in his first published draft, said no such incentive exists in the Senate bill to hire provisional immigrants over U.S. citizens. Then, informed of his error by commenters , he acknowledged that this incentive does exist. But Kessler argues it is of little importance and — by failing to retract his Pinocchios — implies that raising concern about it equals a lie.

Before detailing many of Kessler’s mistakes — factual and analytical — here is a disclaimer and a bit of perspective so that readers bring an open mind to the facts.

In truth, my work is under attack as much as Cruz’s comment. Kessler links to three of my articles and blog posts and writes that I have “aggressively pushed” the same line of reasoning articulated here by Catherine Frazier, Cruz’s press secretary:

Michelle Malkin: Mass illegal alien amnesty violates our founding principles

The U.S. Constitution does not say that the paramount duty of government is to “Celebrate Diversity” or to “embrace multiculturalism” or to give “every willing worker” in the world a job. The Premable to the U.S. Constitution does not say the Republic was established to keep illegal alien families together, provide illegal alien college tuition discounts, or promote immigrant welfare magnets. It says the Constitution was established “to provide for the common defense, promote the general welfare, and secure the blessings of liberty.”

Our founding fathers recognized that fulfilling these fundamental duties is impossible without an orderly immigration and entrance system that discriminates in favor of those willing, as George Washington put it, to “get assimilated to our customs, measures, [and] laws.”

Assimilation, not amnesty, is at the heart of the American experiment.

And “secure the border, period” — not “secure the border first” as a pesky precondition to a mass illegal alien bailout — is an ongoing, never-ending obligation of our government.

Border security is not something you finish and hastily check off a list in order to move on to another politically correct campaign promise. It is the most basic duty of government and it remains the federal government’s biggest failure.

The Hill: Sessions: Opposition to border security amendment will grow:

Sen. Jeff Sessions (R-Ala.), an outspoken critic of the Senate immigration reform bill, predicted Sunday that GOP opposition to the measure will grow as lawmakers learn more of its details.

John Hayward, The Conversation: Marco Rubio makes his case for immigration reform:

Senator Marco Rubio (R-FL) wrote an article for Human Events today, defending his immigration reform proposals.  A sample, in which he discusses the border security provisions of the Corker-Hoeven amendment:

The Republican Border Surge Plan was developed with input from border patrol officials, border state officials, and security experts. It stipulates that no illegal immigrant can even apply to become a legal permanent resident of the U.S. until at least ten years have elapsed and until five security triggers are achieved.

Liz Sheld, The Conversation: Rubio Image Drops 15pts this Year Among GOP Voters:

Marco Rubio (R-FL) has seen his favorables drop over the course of the year, according to a new Rasmussen Report poll.  Fifty-eight percent of GOP voters have a favorable opinion of Rubio in these latest figures. Those numbers are “down 10 points since May and 15 points since February. Sixteen percent (16%) of GOP voters have an unfavorable opinion of him, while 25% are undecided.”


After Sen. Bob Corker (R-TN) admitted the amendment he and Sen. John Hoeven (R-ND) offered to the immigration bill will not improve immigration law enforcement, Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) National Council president Chris Crane told Breitbart News he is shocked lawmakers would still want to pass the bill.

“So that’s the answer from U.S. Senators,” Crane, an ICE agent and a former marine, told Breitbart News exclusively on Sunday morning. “They know the bill is bad but plan to pass it anyway? With billions of taxpayer dollars to be spent and the safety of the public on the line, Senators plan to pass the buck to the House with hopes they might fix it? Anti-enforcement special interests have succeeded in pressuring the Senate from doing what’s best for America. This is why America has lost faith in its lawmakers.”

Points and Figures: Immigration Bill Almost Done:

The gang of 8 in the Senate wants a cloture vote on immigration.  They shouldn’t, because the bill isn’t very good.  It’s another lesson in how the sausage is made in Washington DC.

Clearly, the US needs high quality immigrants to come here.  We want to be that shining city on the hill, and a destination country for people all over the world.  One of the portfolio companies I invested in, Brilliant, identifies those immigrants.  Stories like the one I wrote about yesterday are the epitome of the American Dream.

But, this bill stinks. It’s full of loopholes and special interests.   It plays politics.  The guys at Powerline do a great job analyzing it.

Gateway Pundit: Rand Paul on Immigration Reform: Without Security Triggers, ‘I Can’t Support Final Bill’ (Video):

Senator Rand Paul told liberal CNN host Candy Crowley on State of the Union he will not vote for the immigration bill.

“We’ve thrown a lot of money at a lot of problems in our country. To me, what really tells me that they’re serious is to let Congress vote on whether the border is secure. If the people in the country want to be assured that we will not get another ten million people to come here illegally over the next decade, they have to believe that they’re going to vote through their Congress.”

Heritage: 10 Problems with the Gang of Eight Immigration Bill:


Gateway Pundit: Enough Is Enough… ‘Gang of 8′ Members Jeff Flake & John McCain Face Recall Petitions:

You can sign the petitions here and here.

John Ransom, Townhall: The White House Beatings to Continue Until Morale Improves:

You can always count on the White House to react strongly to “internal” threats.

Yes, the folks who could care less who is blowing up whom in Syria, Libya or Boston, takes people who snitch on them very seriously.

Their newest weapon is a program called “Inside Threat,” which, according to McClatchy, is designed not to just to clamp down on classified leaks, but rather to make sure ANY unauthorized disclosure of ANY information that make them look bad will leave a mark on the miscreant leaker.

Given the proclivities of the administration to impale themselves on the sharp edge of many of their policies, it’s no wonder they have no time for the economy, jobs, the war in Afghanistan, the immigration reform, budgets, national security briefings and all the other effluvia of governing.

What with vacations and stopping the whistle blowers, time is short.

“President Barack Obama’s unprecedented initiative, known as the Insider Threat Program,” writes, “is sweeping in its reach. It has received scant public attention even though it extends beyond the U.S. national security bureaucracies to most federal departments and agencies nationwide, including the Peace Corps, the Social Security Administration and the Education and Agriculture departments. It emphasizes leaks of classified material, but catchall definitions of ‘insider threat’ give agencies latitude to pursue and penalize a range of other conduct.”

It’s received scant attention because the media, which makes money to report this type of abuse of power, is hoping still that Bo loves them, even though they have had some tiffs of late.

Just like the wife who excuses the abusive husband, they’ve deluded themselves that really, come on, he means well.

Legal Insurrection: Monday is Lawmageddon:

1.  Zimmerman Trial Opening Statement and Prosecution case– 9 a.m.

We’ll have our live coverage, including video embed and live Twitter stream, as well as commentary during the day and in an end-of-day wrap up from Andrew Branca.  If you haven’t seen his coverage so far, you’ve missed out.

2.  Supreme Court — 10 a.m.

We almost certainly will get one of the big 4 decisions from the Supreme Court — Gay Marriage/DOMA, Voting Rights Act, Affirmative Action.

I’m guessing Voting Rights Act. We’ll have coverage as decisions are released starting at 10 a.m.

3.  Senate Amnesty Vote — 5:30 p.m..

This is an attempt by Democrats aided and abetted by anywhere from 10-15 Republicans, to damage the rule of law by rewarding law-breakers and making fools of law-abiders, and giving Janet Napolitano sweeping power to disregard the law in her discretion.

LifeSite News: Planned Parenthood sues to block Kansas law telling mothers baby is ‘separate, unique, living human’:

An abortionist and his local Planned Parenthood affiliate sued in federal court Thursday to stop a law that would tell women considering abortion that an unborn child is not a part of her own body and that unborn children can feel pain by the third trimester of pregnancy.

Abortionist Orrin Moore, director of the Overland Park Planned Parenthood, sought to block a provision of the Kansas 2013 Pro-Life Protections Act that requires abortionists to inform mothers who seek abortions that they are ending the life of a “whole, separate, unique, living human being.”

According to Moore, the statement that an abortion terminates the life of a separate human being is “a misleading statement of philosophical and/or religious belief.”

He claims in his lawsuit that the law violates his First Amendment right to free speech by forcing him to say something he personally believes to be untrue.

If I want to call the moon the sun – that’s my First Amendment right, dammit. And no one is allowed to tell me otherwise, or they’re infringing on my rights!

Weasel Zippers: Obama Family’s $100 Million Trip To Africa Among Most Expensive Presidential Trips Ever…

To give you an idea how expensive this is, Bill Clinton’s most expensive trip cost taxpayers $63.5 million, which is $36.5 less than Obama’s.

Via US News:

President Obama’s trip to Africa starting Wednesday is drawing criticism for its vast expense, estimated at up to $100 million, but presidential travel has become an easy target for critics over the years no matter who is in the White House.

President Bill Clinton was roundly criticized for making his own Africa trip in 1998. The cost of the visit, which was considered excessive at the time, was $42.7 million, according to the Government Accountability Office, and that tabulation didn’t include Secret Service expenses.

Clinton’s trip to Asia in 2000 was even more expensive, and Clinton was a lame duck then, only months away from leaving office. His Asia visit cost taxpayers $63.5 million. This included not only the expenses for operating Air Force One but for more than 60 other aircraft to transport U.S. personnel and equipment halfway around the world. [...]

Democrats love to spend our money, don’t they?

Hot Air: Breaking: Supreme Court to review Obama recess appointments:

It won’t be for a while, as this session of the Supreme Court will come to an end this week with the release of its most controversial decisions of the term.  However, next year, the court will hear arguments on what constitutes a recess, and how much power the President has to make appointments without the advice and consent of the Senate:

President Obama’s recess appointments to a federal agency– made without Senate confirmation– will be reviewed by the Supreme Court, a major constitutional test of executive power. …

The case sets up a high-stakes Supreme Court fight between the other two branches of government. Oral arguments will be held in public session later this year or early next.

This was inevitable, since the White House made it clear that it would not accept the decision of an appellate court that not only struck down Barack Obama’s appointments to the NLRB (and Richard Cordray to the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau), but also severely limited recess-appointment power overall. A second appellate decision didn’t go quite as far in May, but still negated the NLRB’s work since those appointments.


 The government of Hong Kong issued a press release today in response to a DOJ extradition request for Edward Snowden.
Liz Sheld, The Conversation: Snowden Heading to Cuba, US Warns Latin American Nations UPDATED: Snowden Not on Plane:

An Interfax source reports that the flight to Cuba would pass through US airspace, allowing the US to ground the flight.

Edward Snowden is expected to to fly to Cuba this morning, after spending the night in Moscow’s airport. There is speculation his final destination is Ecuador, where they are “considering” his request for asylum. Ecuador’s Foreign Minister Ricardo Patino said Snowden’s request involved “freedom of expression and … the security of citizens around the world.”

Several sources have confirmed that Snowden had checked in for a flight to Havana, scheduled to leave at 6:05amET.

Weasel Zippers: Russian Paper Reporting Snowden Will Meet With Russian Intelligence, Deciding Next Move. Russia Reportedly Will Not Expel Him, Despite U.S. Request:

The following report from the Russian paper Izvestiya notes that Snowden will meet with Russian intelligence, that his flight to Russia was coordinated with the government and WikiLeaks, and that he managed to hoodwink the press who thought he would be on flight to Cuba.


Gary McCoy cartoon via Townhall

AEI: Yes, IRS Harassment Blunted The Tea Party Ground Game:

In a new research paper, Andreas Madestam (from Stockholm University), Daniel Shoag and David Yanagizawa-Drott (both from the Harvard Kennedy School), and I set out to find out how much impact the Tea Party had on voter turnout in the 2010 election. We compared areas with high levels of Tea Party activity to otherwise similar areas with low levels of Tea Party activity, using data from the Census Bureau, the FEC, news reports, and a variety of other sources. We found that the effect was huge: the movement brought the Republican Party some 3 million-6 million additional votes in House races. That is an astonishing boost, given that all Republican House candidates combined received fewer than 45 million votes. It demonstrates conclusively how important the party’s newly energized base was to its landslide victory in those elections, and how worried Democratic strategists must have been about the conservative movement’s momentum.

The Tea Party movement’s huge success was not the result of a few days of work by an elected official or two, but involved activists all over the country who spent the year and a half leading up to the midterm elections volunteering, organizing, donating, and rallying. Much of these grassroots activities were centered around 501(c)4s, which according to our research were an important component of the Tea Party movement and its rise.

The bottom line is that the Tea Party movement, when properly activated, can generate a huge number of votes-more votes in 2010, in fact, than the vote advantage Obama held over Romney in 2012. The data show that had the Tea Party groups continued to grow at the pace seen in 2009 and 2010, and had their effect on the 2012 vote been similar to that seen in 2010, they would have brought the Republican Party as many as 5 – 8.5 million votes compared to Obama’s victory margin of 5 million.

Walid Showbat: Audio: Saudi National Injured in Boston Marathon bombing interviewed / supported by Huma Abedin Defender?:

Some may remember that after the Boston marathon bombing, a Saudi National named Abdul Rahman Ali Al-Harbi, who had been hospitalized after the blast, was identified as a ‘suspect’, then a ‘person of interest’, and then as a witness / innocent bystander. Walid wrote extensively about the Al-Harbi clan in Saudi Arabia.

Now, this Saudi National Al-Harbi has broken his silence via an interview with a woman named Amina Chaudary. As Diana West points out, in the interview, Chaudary pushes the narrative that there was no cause for alarm when it came to Al-Harbi; the DHS document which shows the Saudi National as being set for deportation under 212, 3B says otherwise, which all but torpedoes Chaudary’s credibility.

That leads us to – if you can believe it – former Deputy Chief of Staff to Hillary Clinton, Huma Abedin, who has extensive and irrefutable ties to the Muslim Brotherhood, through her family. When Rep. Michele Bachmann began getting attacked after naming Abedin in a letter to the State Department’s Deputy Inspector General, we began a list of Abedin’s defenders. When viewed in its totality, Republican Senators John McCain and Marco Rubio – along with House Speaker John Boehner – come off looking quite bad for being on that list.

You know who else is on that list?

A woman named Amina Chaudary, who made the list after publishing an article entitled, “We’re all Huma Abedins”. Guess what else? A woman with this very same name sat on the Board of the same Muslim Student Association (MSA) that Huma Abedin did – though at different times – at George Washington University (GWU).

Raymond Ibrahim, Islam Translated: Syria: Child Tied by U.S.-Supported Jihadis and Forced to Watch Killing of Parents:


According to Syrian Truth’s Facebook page, the above photo is of a toddler living in the Deir ez-Zor Governate in eastern Syria, bordering Iraq. She was tied up by members of the U.S.-supported “Free Syrian Army” — which is dominated by foreign, Sunni jihadis — and made to watch as her mother and father were killed for being Shia. Here is how the Obama administration is using your tax dollars — mockingly in the name of “freedom.”


Syrian Truth is a pro-Assad propaganda FB site, so this picture could have been staged…

Whatever the truth is – that image will haunt my dreams.

Watcher of Weasels: Forum: What Is Your Prediction For The Outcome Of The Trayvon Martin Trial?

The jury for the Trayvon Martin case has been seated…six women, five white and 1 Hispanic.

What Is Your Prediction For The Outcome Of  The Trayvon Martin Trial?

Rhymes With Right: Frankly, I expect the jury to hang. Surely one juror will be adamantly supportive of conviction after the trial is completed. Surely one will have unshakeable reasonable doubt. Lord only knows what the remaining four will have to say — but it does not matter. Just having those two is a recipe for a hung jury.

What happens after the verdict will be more telling than the verdict itself.

The Conversation: McConnell bugger threatens To Take ‘Louisville Slugger’ To NRSC Comms Director:

Despite being the subject of a criminal investigation, the 44 year old activist, who is unemployed and currently living  with his sister in California, has kept a fairly high profile in the media.

He has written a piece for Salon, a national news website, in which he acknowledged making the recording, and has gone on national television to imply that members of political action committees illegally attended the McConnell meeting.

He’s also given numerous interviews with local reporters. “Since I have not done anything nearly as egregious as anyone has alleged, I feel like I should not cower and hide,” he said.

Morrison is also a prolific twitter user who exchanged the following tweets with Dayspring on June 22:

(Read on at the link)

More of my weekend posts at the Conversation: 

Paula Deen (Democrat) Campaigned For Obama

What The Heck, Yahoo?

Paula Deen Is Done: Food Network Will Not Renew Her Contract

  • Blog Stats

    • 4,642,845 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: