“Icewater in His Veins”: While Doherty and Woods Were Fighting For Their Lives, Obama Was Sleeping Soundly


The biggest problem on the night of the Benghazi attack,  Panetta testified, was “nobody knew really what was going on.” And why would they? After the 5:00 meeting at the White House on 9/11/12, there was no further discussion between Obama and his Defense Secretary. The President was AWOL. The Sec of State was AWOL. Everybody else was twiddling their thumbs….while minutes turned to hours and hours turned to the entire night.

While former Navy SEALS Doherty and Woods were rescuing Americans from the consulate, and later fighting for their lives at the CIA annex, Obama was sleeping soundly in his bed. He had a big campaign event in Las Vegas the next day.

There would be 32 more dead U.S.citizens if it were not for the brave actions taking by Doherty and Woods. They and a few others were the only people fighting back against the attacks on the CIA annex and the Consulate.

At Human Events, John Hayward reported:

The Weekly Standard sums up a little bit of testimony from outbound Defense Secretary Leon Panetta that will be a mere footnote for Barack Obama, but probably would have brought down a Republican President.  At 5:00 PM on the afternoon of the Benghazi consulate attack, Panetta had a scheduled meeting with President Obama… who then walked away from the whole mess and never looked back:

Panetta said, though he did meet with Obama at a 5 o’clock prescheduled gathering, the president left operational details, including knowledge of what resources were available to help the Americans under siege, “up to us.”

In fact, Panetta says that the night of 9/11, he did not communicate with a single person at the White House. The attack resulted in the deaths of four Americans, including Ambassador Chris Stevens.

Obama did not call or communicate in anyway with the defense secretary that night. There were no calls about what was going on in Benghazi. He never called to check-in.

The 5 o’clock meeting was a pre-scheduled 30-minute session, where, according to Panetta’s recollection, they spent about 20 minutes talking a lot about the American embassy that was surrounded in Egypt and the situation that was just unfolding in Benghazi.

This is pretty much what we right-wing types suspected all along.  Empty Chair, bumps in the road.

….And the reason for the anti-Mohammed YouTube video cover story.

They figured they could get away with it –  what with our totally corrupt and Obama-compliant media. And hell – they did get away with it. Obama was reelected and one of the worst offenders in this mess is the front runner for the 2016 election. Take a bow, Candy Crowley. Your lack of professionalism and blatant bias may have cost you your job at CNN, but you were very instrumental in helping to secure the White House for your precious ones. And that’s all that really matters at the end of the day, right?

At the Conversation,Joel Pollock linked to the excellent Kyle Clark interview (KUSA, Denver), memorable because it was one of the very few times Obama actually had to field some tough questions from a hard nosed reporter. Clark wanted to know if the men were denied requests for help during the attack.

….Obama said in October that he had given “three directives” as soon as he found out “what was going on”–i.e. as the attacks were ongoing:

…the minute I found out what was going on I gave three very clear directives. Number one, make sure we are securing our personnel and that we are doing whatever we need to. Number two, we are going to investigate exactly what happened and make sure it doesn’t happen again. Number three, find out who did this so we can bring them to justice.

Maybe it’s time to ask Obama about those Benghazi ‘directives’.

Mark Levin dissected all this news on his show, tonight.

“Obama didn’t lift a finger!” He bellowed. “He didn’t give an order, he didn’t give a directive and do everything possible to help those people right now. I’m telling you right now, as somebody who worked for Ronald Reagan –  Reagan would have known what assets we had out there, how quickly  we can act, go protect those people, do whatever the hell you have to do –  Obama didn’t do any of that!!!!”

“Our Ambassador, Americans, our consulate – under attack, fighting for their lives! And the President of the United States apparently went to sleep. Or maybe to a concert. Or maybe planning his next golf game. I don’t know. But he was AWOL.”


Audio at The Right Scoop.


Joel Pollak, Big Government: Dereliction of Duty: Obama Did Nothing to Save American Lives in Benghazi–and Lied About It:

Panetta’s testimony directly contradicts President Obama’s own claim to have issued “three directives” as soon as he learned “what was going on” in Benghazi. As he told a Denver reporter in October:

I gave three very clear directives. Number one, make sure we are securing our personnel and that we are doing whatever we need to. Number two, we are going to investigate exactly what happened and make sure it doesn’t happen again. Number three, find out who did this so we can bring them to justice.

That same claim was subsequently repeated by other Democrats, including Chicago mayor Rahm Emanuel, who came to the president’s defense. But if those directives were indeed given–and proof has never been produced–they were given long after the attack, not while the attack was going on, during which time the president did nothing.

Panetta and Dempsey also admitted, under questioning by Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX), that they were not in touch with Secretary of State Hillary Clinton during the attacks, and did not receive a request for help from the State Department. Dempsey also testified that he had been “surprised” at Clinton’s testimony last month that she did not know of an urgent cable from Ambassador Stevens last August about the dire security situation.

To borrow a metaphor from the 2008 Democratic primary campaign: when the 3 a.m. call came (at 5 p.m. in the afternoon), neither Clinton nor Obama were there to respond.

Linked by Michelle Malkin, and Maggie’s Notebook, thanks!

Nice: Dr. Benjamin Carson Decries Political Correctness, Moral Decay and Fiscal Irresponsibility in National Prayer Breakfast Speech (Video)

 Dr. Benjamin S. Carson, a world-renowned pediatric neurosurgeon at Johns Hopkins Hospital delivered what is being described as one of the more unique speeches delivered at this morning’s National Prayer Breakfast. Rush Limbaugh raved about it on his show, today, because the good doctor took the opportunity to share his theories about the national debt, deficits, taxation and health care, all in opposition to  Obama’s policies.

(Updated with better video via Freedom’s Lighthouse)

The Blaze reported:

His keynote, while predicated upon the theme of Jesus Christ as his ultimate role model, also took a starkly political tone, advocating against some of the very policies the president has implemented.

At the beginning of his speech, Carson shared an intense disdain for political correctness. Without getting too specific on the issue front, he said that Americans should stop being afraid to speak up and defend their beliefs; he also encouraged people to respect the individuals they disagree with. Carson held little back, condemning political correctness as “a horrible thing” that is “dangerous,” as it hampers freedom of thought and expression.


The speech took an interesting turn when the doctor cautioned that moral decay and fiscal irresponsibility can have dire consequences — even for powerful countries like America. Here, he became even more pointed and impassioned.

“I think particularly about ancient Rome. Very powerful — nobody could even challenge them militarily…they destroyed themselves from within,” Carson continued. “Moral decay. Fiscal irresponsibility.”

Keith Koffler of White House Dossier reported that Obama appeared “exceedingly sleepy” at the Prayer Breakfast today, “looking like he was having trouble staying awake as others spoke and delivering his own remarks ponderously, with heavy eyelids and a tired visage.”

Obama told lawmakers Thursday that he hopes the spiritual lessons of the National Prayer Breakfast would carry over from the event — something he says hasn’t really happened in years past – suggesting that growing spiritually means agreeing with HIM,  “You’d like to think that the shelf life wasn’t so short,” Obama said. “After previous prayer breakfasts, I go back to the Oval Office and I start watching the cable news networks — and it’s like we didn’t pray!”


Here’s video of his remarks.

Obama, who rarely holds a publicly announced event before 10:00 am and is known to be a nighthawk, was forced to show up at the breakfast at 7:55 am.

While listening to the warmup speakers, the president’s eyes were frequently downcast, he appeared drawn, and he was chewing gum, presumably the Nicorette he is known to use to satisfy his nicotine addiction without smoking. He occasionally brushed a finger onto an eye, as if trying to remove morning crust or wetness. He sometimes seemed to miss his cues to laugh or smile politely at jokes.

Obama appeared to labor particularly hard to stay awake while opera singer Andrea Bocelli performed a dirge-like classical song accompanied only by piano.

Koffler says Obama did perk up a bit for Dr.  Carson’s keynote speech, but began “getting sleepy again when Carson started promoting a flat tax.”

Linked by Twitchy, thanks!

Brennan to Face Questions About Drones and Leaks at his Nomination Hearing, Today


According to Fox News’  sources in Washington, Obama’s nominee for CIA director could make Chuck Hagel’s rocky confirmation hearing, today, look like a cakewalk.

John Brennan, currently the president’s top counterterrorism adviser, will appear before the Senate Intelligence Committee on Thursday afternoon. Unlike Hagel, the Defense secretary nominee who endured withering criticism last week from Republicans, Brennan is facing complaints largely from members of the president’s party.

He’s under fire for his support of the controversial drone program, an issue that flared this week with the leak of a Justice Department memo, though the White House has responded to the controversy by agreeing to release more of its internal memos justifying strikes on terrorist targets overseas.

Brennan also faces continued questions about his views on Bush-era interrogation tactics. Republicans, meanwhile, have lingering questions for Brennan on his knowledge of high-profile leaks last year.

Yes, indeed. The leak scandal that threatened to torpedo Obama’s reelection, last summer, was forgotten (when it could have made a difference) by the  Fall, but that doesn’t mean  John Brennan doesn’t still have some ‘splainin’ to do.

AEI’s Marc Thiessen has provided a list of the top ten national security leaks Brennan needs to explain to the Senate. The curious timing of most of these disclosures is something the Senators should be focusing on.

With the exception of the bin Laden leaks (which began in May 2011) and the exposure of the Israeli basing agreement with Azerbaijan (March 2012), every one of these leaks occurred over a three-month period between May and August of 2012. Six of the most egregious ones took place in just a 25-day period in May/June 2012. All came in the midst of President Obama’s re-election campaign, when he was aggressively making the case for his national security leadership in the war on terror.

Coincidence? Not likely. Brennan should be asked explain this strange confluence of events. He should be asked whether he has been questioned in the investigations into any of these leaks. He should be asked to provide the intelligence committee with a list of everyone who was “in the room” when the presidential briefing on Stuxnet, which was quoted by the Times, took place. He should be asked who else has been questioned, and whether any senior Obama aides have been told they are the targets of an investigation. He should be asked why so many of these leaks took place in a brief period in the midst of a presidential campaign.

Thiessen added an eleventh ObamaLeak Brennan needs to answer for in an update.

The Stuxnet leak to the New York Times was particularly egregious. A top Justice Department official told Thiessen, earlier this month, “if done for political gain, rather than for a bona fide purpose advancing the public interests of the United States, it could be grounds for impeachment.”

Jack Cashill suggested another line of questioning for Republican Senators; the role Brennan played in Obama’s 2008 campaign, specifically his possible involvement in the multiple breaches of the presidential candidates’ passport records in March of 2008.

But don’t hold your breath on that on that.

You can watch the hearing live on CSPAN at 2:30 (ET).