Jump to content


Getting an "Insecure Connection" warning for Exisle? No worry

Details in this thread

misled with talking points before elections?

Bengazi 2013 white house

  • Please log in to reply
35 replies to this topic

#21 Cait

Cait

    Democracy Dies in Darkness

  • Moderator
  • 10,810 posts

Posted 13 May 2013 - 12:59 PM

Quote


REP. ISSA: You know, let’s not blow things out of proportion. This is a failure, it needs to be investigated. Our committee can investigate. Now, Ambassador Pickering, his people and he refused to come before our committee that…
AMB. THOMAS PICKERING (Former Under Secretary of State for Political Affairs/Chair, Accountability Review Board on Benghazi): That is not true.
GREGORY: All right. We’re-- we’re going to get to Ambassador Pickering.
REP. ISSA: We have-- we have it in-- we have it in writing, we have White House correspondence. It may not have been the Ambassador’s decision but it was the White House decision. That has been reversed. We’re inviting him on Monday along with Admiral Mullen to come, to go through, with his papers, a private deposition so we can get the facts in a nonpartisan way.
GREGORY: Right.
REP. ISSA: We’ll have Republicans and Democratic…
GREGORY: Well, all right. Ambassador Pickering, you-- you just jumped in here. You’re willing to appear?
AMB. PICKERING: Of course. I’ve said the day before the hearings, I was willing to appear to come to the very hearings that he disclu-- he excluded me from. The White House told me back that he said…
REP. ISSA: One second. Please-- please don’t tell me I excluded you.
AMB. PICKERING: Well, the-- the majority was-- we were told the majority said I was not welcomed at that hearing. I could come at some other time.
REP. ISSA: Well, as-- as the ambassador just said, the day before the hearing, if the White House said we’d like to have him, there’s a procedure. He could have been the Democratic witness. And we would have allowed him. The Democrats requested no witness. The fact is, we don’t want to have some sort of a stage show. We had fact witnesses. They testified. We have the Ambassador and-- and Admiral Mullen who conducted and oversaw the ARB. We’re inviting them on Monday. We’ll go through, not in front of the public but-- but in a nonpartisan way questions and answers and then obviously…
GREGORY: All right.

Just to point out that Issa has his own slippery view at the truth.  He blamed the Democrats on the Committee for not inviting Pickering.  Issa is the chairman, you'd think the chairman would want to get at the truth. He says he does. You'd think he would invite all the people he thought would help arrive at that truth.  Instead he just hid behind "procedure" to explain why Pickering wasn't included.  And, once cornered, Issa now will have these witnesses appear in private.  How convenient.  He doesn't want a show hearing, but had no problem with putting on that show last Friday.

Please.  

Issa is no better than any other partisan in this.  I feel so much better knowing that the truth was sacrificed for "procedure".  

And this is why these hearing can be and usually are laughable, even though I always watch then.  Each side seeks the truth from the well of their partisan politics.  They all act like they are attorneys presenting a case before a jury from opposing sides, instead of leaders seeking the truth.

Rules for surviving an Autocracy:

Rule#1: Believe the Autocrat.
Rule#2: Do not be taken in by small signs of normality.
Rule#3: Institutions will not save you.
Rule#4: Be outraged.
Rule#5: Don't make compromises.
Rule#6: Remember the future.

Source:
http://www2.nybooks....r-survival.html


#22 Omega

Omega

    Maktel shcree lotak meta setak Oz!

  • Moderator
  • 4,032 posts

Posted 13 May 2013 - 01:03 PM

View PostKota, on 13 May 2013 - 12:45 PM, said:

View PostOmega, on 13 May 2013 - 12:17 PM, said:

View Postscherzo, on 13 May 2013 - 11:35 AM, said:

Quote

But why interject the, oh "This is just another occasion for Republican Bashing".
Because that's all Omega's post is.

Is there a particular reason you say things that can be verified as false by anyone scrolling up half a dozen posts?

Really?

You wrote this:

Quote

But I'd also say Congres is wasting a huge amount of time when they have actual work to do. Since the GOP House has a history of abusing their power to embarrass Democrat presidents for politilcal ends, I really can't trust them. When they describe a former Ambassador as refusing to testify at their hearings, and then that ambassador comes out saying he wanted to and was told they didn't want him, their credibility is pretty well shot.

And that was not my entire post. It was a small subset of it. Which was my point.

#23 Omega

Omega

    Maktel shcree lotak meta setak Oz!

  • Moderator
  • 4,032 posts

Posted 13 May 2013 - 01:03 PM

View PostKota, on 13 May 2013 - 12:45 PM, said:

You're want to say this is the Republican's fault, but hardly they aren't in charge.

Now you're responding to things nobody even said. It is possible to blame the Republicans for their actions and attitudes, and the trust this has cost them, while not blaming them for everything ever done. It's unfortunate that I apparently need to point this out.

I wanted to discuss the facts of this matter. I find them interesting, because I want to assign blame where it is due. Unfortunately, my clear statements to that effect have been completely ignored and misrepresented in this thread, turning it into yet another "ALL THE LIBERALS DO IS BLAME REPUBLICANS FOR EVERYTHING" self-pity-fest. Those of us interested in discussion are being drowned out by those who clearly and explicitly are not. I'm out, and starting a new thread.

Edited by Omega, 13 May 2013 - 01:21 PM.


#24 Kota

Kota
  • Islander
  • 417 posts

Posted 13 May 2013 - 10:00 PM

Quote

And, once cornered, Issa now will have these witnesses appear in private.

Pickering should be thankful, he would have been picked apart for his faulty investigating, when the board couldn't bother to interview the head of the department he was investigating.  
Why, Pickering had already decided who was responsible for the failures in Benghazi and they (the board) saw no need to talk with Clinton. Those he blamed fell below the secretary's level, good lord is that who is running the county?

Not to worry - he interviewed people who were at meetings with her.

Pickering Rambles


#25 Cait

Cait

    Democracy Dies in Darkness

  • Moderator
  • 10,810 posts

Posted 13 May 2013 - 10:42 PM

View PostKota, on 13 May 2013 - 10:00 PM, said:

Quote

And, once cornered, Issa now will have these witnesses appear in private.

Pickering should be thankful, he would have been picked apart for his faulty investigating,  

I would think, that anyone,  you included, who seeks the truth would welcome open hearings.  Perhaps you have some inside information that would make Pickering glad to testify in private,  but us regular citizens are not glad.  Of course, without open hearings, you [first person singular here] can pretty much make up anything you like about his investigation and those he interviewed.  I would be interested in the content of the Classified report, and since you know so much, perhaps you could share the info.  Oops, that's right you don't have the security clearance.  Oh well, I suppose we'll all have to rely on Conservative outlets for the content of the Classified Report.

As for being picked apart, did you actually watch the hearings on Friday,  or did you just catch the highlight reel on your favorite news outlet?

Rules for surviving an Autocracy:

Rule#1: Believe the Autocrat.
Rule#2: Do not be taken in by small signs of normality.
Rule#3: Institutions will not save you.
Rule#4: Be outraged.
Rule#5: Don't make compromises.
Rule#6: Remember the future.

Source:
http://www2.nybooks....r-survival.html


#26 scherzo

scherzo

    I know things

  • Islander
  • 3,388 posts

Posted 14 May 2013 - 08:45 AM

Quote

Oh well, I suppose we'll all have to rely on Conservative outlets for the content of the Classified Report.
Considering that's the only source that seemed to have a grasp on the Benghazi subject right from jump, the dismissive tone is grating quite a bit more than usual.
"Well, the trouble with our liberal friends is not that they're ignorant; it's just that they know so much that isn't so."    -Ronald Reagan, October 27 1964
Posted Image

#27 scherzo

scherzo

    I know things

  • Islander
  • 3,388 posts

Posted 14 May 2013 - 09:02 AM

Quote

Unfortunately, my clear statements to that effect have been completely ignored and misrepresented in this thread, turning it into yet another "ALL THE LIBERALS DO IS BLAME REPUBLICANS FOR EVERYTHING" self-pity-fest.
Your clear statements were the usual knee-jerk trashing of your default super-villains, on a topic where their hands couldn't possibly be any cleaner. Lashing out at anyone who made the mistake of reading it would be tedious enough, without piggy-backing on Cait's absurd "self pity" insult. Maybe the better solution would be simply dealing with the sh*tload of incontrovertible evidence that your President is a lying snake.
Obama’s claim he called Benghazi an ‘act of terrorism’
"Well, the trouble with our liberal friends is not that they're ignorant; it's just that they know so much that isn't so."    -Ronald Reagan, October 27 1964
Posted Image

#28 Kota

Kota
  • Islander
  • 417 posts

Posted 14 May 2013 - 09:14 AM

View PostCait, on 13 May 2013 - 10:42 PM, said:

View PostKota, on 13 May 2013 - 10:00 PM, said:

Quote

And, once cornered, Issa now will have these witnesses appear in private.

Pickering should be thankful, he would have been picked apart for his faulty investigating,  

I would think, that anyone,  you included, who seeks the truth would welcome open hearings.  Perhaps you have some inside information that would make Pickering glad to testify in private,  but us regular citizens are not glad.  Of course, without open hearings, you [first person singular here] can pretty much make up anything you like about his investigation and those he interviewed.  I would be interested in the content of the Classified report, and since you know so much, perhaps you could share the info.  Oops, that's right you don't have the security clearance.  Oh well, I suppose we'll all have to rely on Conservative outlets for the content of the Classified Report.

As for being picked apart, did you actually watch the hearings on Friday,  or did you just catch the highlight reel on your favorite news outlet?

QFR

#29 Cait

Cait

    Democracy Dies in Darkness

  • Moderator
  • 10,810 posts

Posted 14 May 2013 - 10:42 AM

View PostKota, on 14 May 2013 - 09:14 AM, said:

View PostCait, on 13 May 2013 - 10:42 PM, said:

View PostKota, on 13 May 2013 - 10:00 PM, said:

Quote

And, once cornered, Issa now will have these witnesses appear in private.

Pickering should be thankful, he would have been picked apart for his faulty investigating,  

I would think, that anyone,  you included, who seeks the truth would welcome open hearings.  Perhaps you have some inside information that would make Pickering glad to testify in private,  but us regular citizens are not glad.  Of course, without open hearings, you [first person singular here] can pretty much make up anything you like about his investigation and those he interviewed.  I would be interested in the content of the Classified report, and since you know so much, perhaps you could share the info.  Oops, that's right you don't have the security clearance.  Oh well, I suppose we'll all have to rely on Conservative outlets for the content of the Classified Report.

As for being picked apart, did you actually watch the hearings on Friday,  or did you just catch the highlight reel on your favorite news outlet?

QFR

I have one small edit to my post, but I'll put it here for the record.  I meant to indicate that I was using the 2nd person singular when I used "you".  I was not speaking generically.  I was speaking directly to you Kota.

Rules for surviving an Autocracy:

Rule#1: Believe the Autocrat.
Rule#2: Do not be taken in by small signs of normality.
Rule#3: Institutions will not save you.
Rule#4: Be outraged.
Rule#5: Don't make compromises.
Rule#6: Remember the future.

Source:
http://www2.nybooks....r-survival.html


#30 Cait

Cait

    Democracy Dies in Darkness

  • Moderator
  • 10,810 posts

Posted 16 May 2013 - 07:11 PM

http://www.washingto...by-white-house/

From a story about the just released emails from the WH/agencies about Benghazi.

Quote

According to the emails and initial CIA-drafted talking points, the agency believed the attack included a mix of Islamist extremists from Ansar al-Sharia, an al-Qaeda affiliated group, and angry demonstrators.

White House officials did not challenge that analysis, the emails show.

But CIA Deputy Director Michael Morrell later removed the reference to Ansar al-Sharia because, senior administration officials said, the assessment was still classified and because FBI officials believed making the information public could compromise their investigation.

[...]

Quote

The talking points, which were edited a dozen times between Sept. 14 and 15, also show that the source of the debate between the CIA and the State Department was whether previous agency warnings of attacks in the Benghazi area should be included in public statements.

The two agencies had the most at stake in the Benghazi aftermath. The attacks targeted a State Department post and a CIA site, where a U.S.-effort to disarm Libya’s militia in the area was centered. Virtually no Americans were in the diplomatic post, only at the CIA site where the agency was responsible for security.

Senior administration officials said Wednesday that Morrell, who took the lead in editing the talking points drafted by the CIA’s director of of the Office of Terrorism Analysis, agreed with State Department concerns over including the warnings.

But Petraeus, Morrell’s boss at the time, appeared to have reservations about not including the warnings, which would have made the CIA look prescient at the State Department’s expense.

Quote

About two hours later, Petraeus responds to an email with the final talking points form the Office of Legislative Affairs.

“Frankly, I’d just as soon not use this,” Petraeus wrote. “”NSS’s call, to be sure; however, this is certainly not what Vice Chairman Ruppersberger was hoping to get for unclass use.”

Rules for surviving an Autocracy:

Rule#1: Believe the Autocrat.
Rule#2: Do not be taken in by small signs of normality.
Rule#3: Institutions will not save you.
Rule#4: Be outraged.
Rule#5: Don't make compromises.
Rule#6: Remember the future.

Source:
http://www2.nybooks....r-survival.html


#31 offworlder

offworlder

    pls don't kick offworlders, we can find a place too

  • Islander
  • 5,363 posts

Posted 17 May 2013 - 02:16 AM

>' Much more formidable response resources including Special Operations Forces, transport aircraft and attack fighters were available 480 miles away at the U.S. military base in Sigonella, Sicily, but were never dispatched. An F18 fighter jet blazing in with afterburner thundering to unnerve attackers and take out mortar locations could have reached Benghazi in an hour. Commandos could have arrived there within three hours '

now ya see? this is the kind of shyte you get with the republican 'contributors' doing the op ed 'special to us' pieces on this crap- you just get to ride roughshod rampant military just any ole where you want because hey you'r the Big Stick arrogant poser writer types? news flash: Libya is and was a foreign sovereign country, and one which had just kicked out tyrants and were getting their own act together joining the international collaboration of the Med middle sea world; we do not own that country; we cannot just Ride the Air Cav, sock em the Abrams tanks, the jet bombs and missiles, like when in a war against an enemy country; when you put a Consulate in for providing services to your people and visa and info services to the host nation, you have a small focused sec team close in by your people and then you RELY on the host for sec beyond that! like in London, we have a team close in by our diplomats THEN rely on the Brit security beyond that; like any city, any state; we relied on Libyans and some of them bailed, in the witness statements. Too many of the republican contributor writers have this whole Schwartzkopf Gulf War and Iraq/Afghan deal on the brain, think we can just 101 Airborne any ole body we want to , just 82nd ground N pound, just FA-18 and Maverick bomb anywhere, just USA rules all lands ............ sheesh, I am so so tired of that lot, those contributor writers and their dreck.
"(Do you read what they say online?) I check out all these scandalous rumours about me and Elijah Wood having beautiful sex with each other ... (are they true?) About Elijah and me being boyfriend and boyfriend? Absolutely true. We've been together for about nine years. I wooed him. No I just like a lot of stuff - I like that someone says one thing and it becomes fact. It's kind of fun." --Dominic Monaghan in a phone interview with Newsweek while buying DVDs at the store. :D

#32 scherzo

scherzo

    I know things

  • Islander
  • 3,388 posts

Posted 24 May 2013 - 01:27 PM

State official caught up in Benghazi controversy in line for new post

Quote

(CNN) - The State Department spokeswoman who earlier this month found herself in the middle of the controversy surrounding key revisions to the Benghazi talking points appears to be in line for a promotion.

The White House announced Thursday that President Barack Obama intends to nominate Victoria Nuland as assistant secretary for European and Eurasian affairs, a position that requires Senate confirmation.

Nuland, who has served as the State Department spokesperson from 2011 until earlier this spring, came under fire from Obama administration critics last week after leaked e-mails revealed she raised concerns with the CIA-prepared talking points on the deadly terror attack last September 11.

Specifically, Nuland asked that references to al Qaeda and previous CIA warnings about threats posed to U.S. diplomats in Libya be scrubbed from the document that was used by U.N. Ambassador Susan Rice on news talk shows to explain the administration's understanding of events in Libya.
Even in the midst of this current sh*t storm...being a sleazebag still improves your chances of moving up the Team 0bama ladder. :sick:
"Well, the trouble with our liberal friends is not that they're ignorant; it's just that they know so much that isn't so."    -Ronald Reagan, October 27 1964
Posted Image

#33 offworlder

offworlder

    pls don't kick offworlders, we can find a place too

  • Islander
  • 5,363 posts

Posted 24 May 2013 - 01:37 PM

just because some reporter reads something in some Email doesn't mean it was exactly true or exactly as he thought it was, you often only know 1/3 of something from reading what someone wrote to a 3rd party- press are famous for reading some clue then AhHa this, proof, when it's nothing of the kind - plus, her fitness fo r the Europe and eurasia desk may not have anything to do with some West wing talking points- plus you often leave out from some public explanation things that are for ongoing ops and relationships best not known, press hat e that but it's a truth even if they hate it, some things are best scrubbed or confidential or at least best not OUT in statements that go international like ALL things in D.C. press go out international. and yes opposing parties Always take advantage of these facts.

Edited by offworlder, 24 May 2013 - 01:38 PM.

"(Do you read what they say online?) I check out all these scandalous rumours about me and Elijah Wood having beautiful sex with each other ... (are they true?) About Elijah and me being boyfriend and boyfriend? Absolutely true. We've been together for about nine years. I wooed him. No I just like a lot of stuff - I like that someone says one thing and it becomes fact. It's kind of fun." --Dominic Monaghan in a phone interview with Newsweek while buying DVDs at the store. :D

#34 Kota

Kota
  • Islander
  • 417 posts

Posted 24 May 2013 - 04:11 PM

View Postscherzo, on 24 May 2013 - 01:27 PM, said:

State official caught up in Benghazi controversy in line for new post

Quote

(CNN) - The State Department spokeswoman who earlier this month found herself in the middle of the controversy surrounding key revisions to the Benghazi talking points appears to be in line for a promotion.

The White House announced Thursday that President Barack Obama intends to nominate Victoria Nuland as assistant secretary for European and Eurasian affairs, a position that requires Senate confirmation.

Nuland, who has served as the State Department spokesperson from 2011 until earlier this spring, came under fire from Obama administration critics last week after leaked e-mails revealed she raised concerns with the CIA-prepared talking points on the deadly terror attack last September 11.

Specifically, Nuland asked that references to al Qaeda and previous CIA warnings about threats posed to U.S. diplomats in Libya be scrubbed from the document that was used by U.N. Ambassador Susan Rice on news talk shows to explain the administration's understanding of events in Libya.
Even in the midst of this current sh*t storm...being a sleazebag still improves your chances of moving up the Team 0bama ladder. :sick:

It is amazing the President couldn't find anyone else to nominate,
doesn't he have at least one other person on his personal payroll to take the job?

Only the bad move to the top in the Obama world, scary isn't it

#35 DarthMarley

DarthMarley
  • Islander
  • 1,292 posts

Posted 25 May 2013 - 06:32 AM

View PostOmega, on 12 May 2013 - 11:36 PM, said:

Defense? I just said the GOP wasn't competent or trustworthy to investigate it. I made it quite clear someone should. Of course, you've said before that you're not here for conversation, so I just point this out in case any other readers happen to get confused by your misrepresentation of my post. :)

Forget whether the GOP is capable of investigating after the fact.
What always troubled me about the incident was how it was reported in the news media as it unfolded.
US interests were attacked abroad on 9/11.
Even noted liberals on this forum knew the "video" claim was bogus.
That the voting public was not concerned is troubling to me.

There is a recent State Dept. promotion that required Senate approval that identifies the woman ( a career govt. worker who once was an aide to Cheney IIRC) who pushed back against the CIA TP.
"It is not who is right, but what is right that is of importance."

#36 DarthMarley

DarthMarley
  • Islander
  • 1,292 posts

Posted 06 November 2014 - 02:45 PM

http://nypost.com/20...protects-obama/

Quote

When the longtime CBS reporter asked for details about reinforcements sent to the Benghazi compound during the Sept. 11, 2012 terrorist attack, White House national security spokesman Tommy Vietor replied, “I give up, Sharyl . . . I’ll work with more reasonable folks that follow up, I guess.”

"It is not who is right, but what is right that is of importance."



Also tagged with one or more of these keywords: Bengazi, 2013, white house

0 user(s) are browsing this forum

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users