Democrats & Liberals Archives

GOP vindicates administration on Benghazi allegations

A report has been released from the GOP-controlled House of Representatives regarding the events of 9/11/2012 in Benghazi, Libya. Every conservative conspiracy theory regarding the incident was thoroughly debunked:

-- No "stand down" order was ever ordered.

-- Air Support was never denied

-- Security for the CIA facility was sufficient

-- Intelligence gathered before September 16, 2012 indicated that the attack evolved from a protest against an islamaphobic YouTube video. Evidence to the contrary was not discovered until two days later.

-- Nobody involved with the incidents was intimidated or forced to sign a non-disclosure agreement

With that said, it seems that yet another GOP talking point has dried up. For better or for worse, Obama has run the cleanest administration seen in our lifetimes without any major scandals. Sure, there have been massive disagreements on policy and procedure when it comes to governing. But there still haven't been any ethical lapses within the White House. This is amazing and I must give Obama my props for the accomplishment. Or maybe I shouldn't, lest I jinx things for Obama's final two years? Oh what the hell, Carpe Diem and all the rest: Congrats to the Whitehouse and all the rest for keeping things so clean!

Read the report here.

Posted by Warren Porter at November 22, 2014 5:36 PM
Comments
Comment #385919

I will say this for you WP, you say more in 2 paragraphs than SD does in an essay. That’s a compliment.

Posted by: George at November 22, 2014 6:26 PM
Comment #385922

No! NO!! NOOOOOOOOOoooooooo, (falling to knees and shaking fist at sky). Curse you Benghazi!

And now, for all those Republicans who gave money and votes to the GOP because of Benghazi, it seems an appropriate time to recall a couple of sage observations:

1) A sucker is born every minute.

2) Never give a sucker an even break.

No refunds, conservatives! All sales are final!

And I have this scandal about the IRS that will outrage you to the point of giving money and voting for Scott Walker and others. You see, the story goes like this…

Posted by: phx8 at November 22, 2014 7:33 PM
Comment #385926

Don’t get your panties in a bind yet phx8, it isn’t over yet. Trey Gowdy still has an investigation going on. As far as the IRS 30,000 E Mails have been recovered that were thought gone, so I wouldn’t start the party yet phx8.

Posted by: Rich KAPitan at November 22, 2014 7:46 PM
Comment #385927

And don’t forget, KAP, when Tea Party Senator Johnson (R-WI) takes over the Senate oversight committee, he has promised lots more Benghazi too! Get out your checkbook!

And yes, more IRS e-mails have been recovered, and with the tens of thousands already recovered, they are sure to show… um…

Benghaziiiiiiiiiii!!!

Posted by: phx8 at November 22, 2014 8:10 PM
Comment #385930

Like I said phx8 don’t start the party yet. The fun is just beginning. This is the last comment to anything you write.

Posted by: Rich KAPitan at November 22, 2014 8:19 PM
Comment #385931
— Intelligence gathered before September 16, 2012 indicated that the attack evolved from a protest against an islamaphobic YouTube video. Evidence to the contrary was not discovered until two days later.

Wow! Can you be anymore deceptive in your translation of Summary Conclusion #4?

Fourth, the Committee concludes that after the attacks, the early intelligence assessments and the Administration’s initial public narrative on the causes and motivations for the attacks were not fully accurate. There was a stream of contradictory and conflicting intelligence that came in after the attacks. The Committee found intelligence to support CIA’s initial assessment that the attacks had evolved out of a protest in Benghazi; but it also found contrary intelligence, which ultimately proved to be the correct intelligence. There was no protest. The CIA only changed its initial assessment about a protest on September 24, 2012, when closed caption television footage became available on September 18, 2012 (two days after Ambassador Susan Rice spoke), and after the FBI began publishing its interviews with U.S. officials on the ground on September 22, 2012.

Your item #4 above should read:

—There was no protest.


Posted by: Weary Willie at November 22, 2014 8:20 PM
Comment #385936
There was no protest.

And ignore the fact that Susan Rice told us what our intelligence indicated to be true? No way!

Posted by: Warren Porter at November 22, 2014 9:16 PM
Comment #385940

Warren, Even the CIA should have realized that RPG’s are NOT your usual equipment you bring to a protest. It took the CIA almost 2 weeks to figure out that it was a terror attack. 4 dead Americans and it takes the CIA 2 weeks? It seems to me that the CIA is not cracked up to be what it should be. RPG’s exploding, men running around with automatic weapons, 4 dead Americans and they say it was spontaneous protest reaction to a video. Is our intelligence community that stupid? Even the acting President of Libya said it was a terror attack almost immediately.

Posted by: Rich KAPitan at November 22, 2014 9:48 PM
Comment #385939

KAP,
No need to respond. But don’t blame me. I was right all along. I was truthful. You listened to people who were not truthful. It was people like Issa and Limbaugh and others misled you. They misled you about Benghazi and the so-called IRS scandal and more. The Obama administration has been one of the most corruption-free and honest administrations in American history. That is a fact. There have been no indictments, no trials, no convictions on any of the so-called scandals, despite a record number of subpoenas issued from Issa’s committee. Conservatives have lied and misled, and you bought it.

Maybe you need to reconsider who you follow- the people who are right, or the people who are wrong.

Posted by: phx8 at November 22, 2014 9:48 PM
Comment #385941

Sorry phx8 IMO you are the one who has been mislead and lied to. END OF DISCUSSION!!!!!!!

Posted by: Rich KAPitan at November 22, 2014 9:54 PM
Comment #385943

Thanks, Warren for presenting the House Intelligence Committee report on Benghazi. Wow! Isn’t the committee controlled by Republicans? Didn’t they consult Darrell Issa? I thought he had the low down on Benghazi.

But, it won’t matter to conservatives. It just doesn’t fit their narrative. They know that Obama lied, Rice lied, that Obama ordered assistance to “stand Down,” etc.

It didn’t matter a few months ago when the Deputy Director of the CIA said that Rice simply conveyed the CIA assessment at the time and that the White House had not attempted to alter their (CIA) “talking Points.” They simply know that she lied.

What you get is the following comment by Rich Kapitan:

“Sorry phx8 IMO you are the one who has been mislead and lied to. END OF DISCUSSION!!!!!!”

Well, I guess I understand. Rogers isn’t a real Republican. In fact, he must be a liberal.

Posted by: Rich at November 22, 2014 10:27 PM
Comment #385945

The Washington Times ran an article yesterday with the heading “CIA acted properly in Benghazi but slow to spot terrorism” which I stated in comment 385940.
Rich my comment to phx8 #385941 is because I will not answer or comment on anymore of his comments. But I do stand by the statement that he and others were mislead and lied to by this administration, take for example “Obamacare”.

Posted by: Rich KAPitan at November 22, 2014 11:00 PM
Comment #385946

Re Obamacare:
I have it. My wife and I are both 57, and we were uninsurable due to pre-existing conditions, except for junk insurance that was expensive and covered very little. We now have insurance coverage. We are both satisfied with it. We have the doctors we wanted, and when we switch next month, we will keep the same doctors. The price is reasonable and I am glad we are insured.

I receive no subsidies; in fact, I will pay a little over $1000 in additional tax due to the income tax provision. I paid last year and I will pay again this year. I am fine with that.

There are no death panels, it has not gone into a death spiral or collapsed under its own weight, about 7 million people are now insured because of it, and me and Mrs Phx8. Young people signed up in sufficient numbers, new enrollees like me have paid for their enrollments, back office provisions have brought health care technology in line with the 21st century (which I have experienced, and is very useful for communicating), new jobs have been created for data processing, and the stocks of insurance companies are doing very well.

If this is how misleading and lies work out, please sir, may I have another!

Posted by: phx8 at November 22, 2014 11:24 PM
Comment #385947

Rich K.,

The issue raised by conservatives regarding the Rice comments was that she and. by implication, the White House were attempting to purposely mislead the public about the nature of the attack and its genesis. In reality, she was only stating what our best intelligence assessment was at the time. That is now confirmed by the House report and previously by the Deputy CIA Director responsible for the “talking points.”

It seems to me that Rice is owed an apology for all the vilification that she received from the right. Rice was called a liar and a shill among other things. She was nothing of the sort. Don’t hold your breath though. There will be no apology. That would be too decent.

Posted by: Rich at November 23, 2014 12:24 AM
Comment #385949

What difference, at this point, does it make?

Posted by: Weary Willie at November 23, 2014 1:26 AM
Comment #385958

Rich, Most people with any kind of sense knew it wasn’t a protest gone wrong. The British pulled their people out of Benghazi, the Red Cross left. The compound had previous small attacks there. But this administration and the CIA didn’t see the signs. The person who owes Rice an apology is Obama for being stupid and the CIA. Refer to comment 385940 and 385945.

Posted by: Rich KAPitan at November 23, 2014 9:05 AM
Comment #385959
Even the acting President of Libya said it was a terror attack almost immediately.

Even Obama called it an act of terror almost immediately. I’m not sure what your point is here.

Even the CIA should have realized that RPG’s are NOT your usual equipment you bring to a protest. It took the CIA almost 2 weeks to figure out that it was a terror attack. 4 dead Americans and it takes the CIA 2 weeks? It seems to me that the CIA is not cracked up to be what it should be. RPG’s exploding, men running around with automatic weapons, 4 dead Americans and they say it was spontaneous protest reaction to a video. Is our intelligence community that stupid?

Which do you think is more likely? KAP is smarter than the entire CIA or is the CIA privvy to contrary facts and evidence that KAP will never see. I’ll go with the latter. Once again, I will repeat: Mike Rogers and the rest of the House Intelligence committee (GOP majority) investigated and found no evidence of wrongdoing.

Posted by: Warren Porter at November 23, 2014 10:35 AM
Comment #385962

Weary,

It probably wouldn’t make much of a difference if conservatives had not persisted for the past two years in alleging the most outrageous and slanderous charges against the President and Ambassador Rice.

Particularly egregious is the charge that the administration ordered military assistance to “stand down” resulting in the preventable deaths of Americans.

Darrell Issa has persisted in repeating this allegation as though it were proven fact despite the absence of any evidence supporting the claim and a prior House Armed Services Committee investigative report denying the existence of such an order.

What is disturbing is the willingness of conservative media outlets to keep the fire of this slanderous allegation burning.

The only positive result from this effort by the conservative right to paint the President as some callous liar willing to sacrifice American lives to protect his selfish agenda is that the American public never bought the narrative to the chagrin of conservative media. The Benghazi rallying point never materialized.

This report should end the most sordid aspects of the Benghazi incident. The House leadership had already begun shutting down the Issa investigations before the release of this Committee report. Good riddance.


Posted by: Rich at November 23, 2014 11:27 AM
Comment #385964

“Even the acting President of Libya said it was a terror attack almost immediately,”

What the Libyan President said was that “the attackers used the protesters outside the consulate as a cover,”http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timeline_of_the_investigation_into_the_2012_Benghazi_attack

The only real difference between what Rice said and what the President of Libya said had to do with whether the attack had been pre-planned by extremist elements with the intent to use demonstrators as cover or was a spontaneous and opportunistic response by such groups to a demonstration. In both instances, it is recognized that extremist militia terrorist groups were involved in the attack. Rice never claimed that the attack was simply an outraged mob gone wild. It was always presented as an attack by extremist militant groups with heavy weaponry, a terrorist attack.

Posted by: Rich at November 23, 2014 11:57 AM
Comment #385965

Warren, Did I say I was smarter then the CIA? NO I DID NOT!!! I did say though that they should have realized that it wasn’t a protest gone wrong and should have called it what it was immediately, A TERROR ATTACK. With all that was going on in Benghazi at the time and other countries pulling out you would think that our state department and president and CIA would have the sense to either pull out or beef up security they failed at their jobs. I don’t really give a crap what the house intel. committee says, IMO they FAILED.

Posted by: Rich KAPitan at November 23, 2014 12:20 PM
Comment #385969
Did I say I was smarter then the CIA? NO I DID NOT!!!

Take a chill pill man. And while you are at it, don’t second guess what the CIA did unless you want to claim to be smarter than they are.

Posted by: Warren Porter at November 23, 2014 1:03 PM
Comment #385970

Warren, Second guess the CIA??? Not second guessing just saying what is obvious and what even the President said after the attack. IMO the CIA was very mistaken NOT to claim Benghazi was a terror attack. Even you could have come to that conclusion!!!!!

Posted by: Rich KAPitan at November 23, 2014 1:36 PM
Comment #385981

KAP,

The CIA never claimed that the consulate at Benghazi was not attacked by extremist militias categorized as terrorist organizations. It was always understood that the consulate was attacked by extremist organizations. What Rice said, using the CIA “talking points,” was that it appeared that the terrorist organizations seized upon an opportunity offered by the protests to attack the consulate with trained fighters and heavy weapons.

Subsequently, the CIA revised its assessment and dropped the theory that the attack was a chance opportunity seized upon by the militias when it became clear that there was never a preliminary general protest.

As for the motivation for the attack and the degree of pre-planning, those issues remain unclear according to the Intelligence Committee findings. The arrested “ringleader” awaiting trial in the US has stated that the “video” was a significant factor in the decision to attack the consulate. It is known that he had said at the time that the attack was in retaliation for the video. Ultimately, Rice may be proven to have been more right than wrong. In any case, it is clear that she wasn’t lying when she appeared on the Sunday news programs.

Posted by: Rich at November 23, 2014 6:07 PM
Comment #385991

It took 2 weeks Rich to come to a decision that it wasn’t a spontaneous reaction to a video. I don’t believe Rice lied. I believe she was just being the administrations scape goat.
Now to me 2 weeks for the CIA was far to long to come to a conclusion that it was a terror attack especially when most of the people in this country knew it was a terror attack. The fact that so many other countries were pulling people out of the area even the Red Cross left, small attacks were previously done on that complex. So it is reasonable to think that the CIA was dragging their feet in their assessment. Why I don’t know but the committee that is investigating now may find out.

Posted by: Rich KAPitan at November 23, 2014 8:30 PM
Comment #385995

How interesting that this report was released “in the dark of night” late on a Friday evening when only the most rabid on either side were likely to pay much attention to it.

That’s taking a bold stance by a less than heroic committee that was so vitriolic in conducting the investigation.

Posted by: kpgray at November 23, 2014 11:03 PM
Comment #386008

Opportunism was always what the whole Benghazi Controversy was about, extracting miles worth of political damage from something that can happen, and has happen under many different Administrations. Here’s the thing: **** happens. Happens to everybody. Happens to the Republicans. Happens to Democrats. Third party comes to power, happens to them, too. Anybody promising that things will be absolutely perfect and nothing bad will ever happen is just selling you a bill of goods. Truth is, things happen in the world. It’s how you respond to it, to the extent you can, that demonstrates your quality. Some people take a bad situations and make it worse. Others improve things, even if they don’t live up to inflated expectations.

I think Obama’s done a fine job, but when the politics gets overheated the way Republicans tend to like it, then everybody gets lost in this laryngitis-inducing shouting match, and people stop paying attention to what they really need to get straight. The Republicans in particular have let that argument become so much a part of everything they do that they don’t even bother to be realistic about things anymore. They simply assume that if they got into power and did things their way, everything would be fine. They may deny this, but how many times do they have to scapegoat Fannie, Freddie, Dodd and Frank for what Wall Street essentially did to itself?

Nobody’s perfect, and the more people get stuck on dogma and trying to defend it, the weaker their ability to adapt and successfully handle the inevitable crises that head their way. That’s why I don’t have much faith in the Republicans to succeed. They care too much about appearances and political platforms to sacrifice what politics demands of them, for what the situation demands. If we have another crash, they will put their ideology ahead of fixing the problem. It won’t be because they don’t want to fix the problem. It will be because they fail to believe that their politics, politicians, and pundits could fail to be up to the job. As much as the Tea Partiers like to believe they’re the radical truth-tellers, and reformers, they’re actually the most credulous of all Republican voters, because they’ve so bought into what they were sold over the years that they won’t even begin to think about taking any other approaches or attitudes about things.

It’s not sustainable. At some point, the Republican Party has to relearn how to do policy in the real world, how to, like adults, deal with disappointment and dissatisfaction to get things done in the real world.

Posted by: Stephen Daugherty at November 24, 2014 8:49 AM
Comment #386010

There was an Ambassador killed, something that hasn’t happened since 1979, so there were issues to find. From just my skimming of the report it looks like it’s pro CIA and puts the blame squarely on State (and I guess Hillary by extension). I doubt that’s the case.

As for the administration they pushed Rice out into the street and then watched the bus run her over.

Posted by: George in SC at November 24, 2014 10:49 AM
Comment #386011

This wasn’t the investigation that was foremost in the news for the last couple of years. I don’t know where and when this investigation started but it’s not the one Darrell Issa was running.

What happened to Kerry testifying about this?

Posted by: Weary Willie at November 24, 2014 12:25 PM
Comment #386014

WW,

it’s not the one Darrell Issa was running

Correct. This report is from the House Intelligence committee chaired by Mike Rogers. Darrell Issa doesn’t serve on that committee; he chairs the Oversight committee instead. Rogers is privy to classified information that neither you, nor I, nor Issa are can access so I’m going to place more trust in his ability to come to an accurate conclusion than whatever rubbish Issa’s circus ends up producing.

What happened to Kerry testifying about this?

Issa withdrew the subpoena last May under pressure from the House Leadership.

KAP,

It took 2 weeks Rich to come to a decision that it wasn’t a spontaneous reaction to a video.

No, it didn’t. If you actually took the time to read the report before criticizing it you may have encountered this:

Various witnesses and senior military officials serving in the Obama Administration testified to this Committee, the House Armed Services Committee, and the Senate Armed Services Committee that they knew from the moment the attacks began that the attacks were deliberate terrorist acts against US interests. No witness has reported believing at any point that the attacks were anything but terrorist attacks.

Along those lines, in the Rose Garden on September 12, 2012, President Obama said that four “extraordinary Americans were killed in an attack on our diplomatic post in Benghazi,” and said that: “[n]o acts of terror will ever shake the resolve of this great nation, alter that character, or eclipse the light of the values that we stand for.


On September 15, the CIA assessed that the attacks were inspired by the September 11 storming of the US Embassy in Cairo. On September 12, the DIA reported that there no indications of preoperational planning, but that a mix of terrorist attackers “likely leveraged a target of opportunity amidst security vulnerabilities created by protest activity.” Weeks afterwards, CIA and NCTC reported that “the attack probably was not specifically planned for 11 September.”

In other words, Rich is correct when he said in Comment #385981

Posted by: Warren Porter at November 24, 2014 1:27 PM
Comment #386016

Warren, If they knew immediately then why the BULLS**T about a VIDEO??? Then everything that was said about the video concerning Benghazi was a lie. I know about what you linked above. The last paragraph you linked IMO is pure BS those protest in Cairo were and again IMO a diversion and an attack like Benghazi had to be planned out because the attackers knew to much. You can’t just gather RPG’s, automatic weapons and the amount of people they had in a moments notice. IMO the House Intel. Committee report is BS. and the Republican who headed it is an IDIOT.

Posted by: Rich KAPitan at November 24, 2014 2:14 PM
Comment #386018
If they knew immediately then why the BULLS**T about a VIDEO
It’s apparent you did not comprehend Rich’s Comment #385981. Reread it.
The last paragraph you linked IMO is pure BS

OK, I got it. Mike Rogers is nothing but a bullshitter. The CIA is a bullshit organization. Mike Morell is also a bullshitter. Only KAP has the intelligence to figure out what is going on. In 2017, don’t forget to submit your name to President Walker for nomination to be CIA director. Or maybe not, perhaps Walker is a bullshitter in cahoots with Mike Rogers.

those protest in Cairo were and again IMO a diversion and an attack like Benghazi had to be planned out because the attackers knew to much. You can’t just gather RPG’s, automatic weapons and the amount of people they had in a moments notice. IMO the House Intel. Committee report is BS. and the Republican who headed it is an IDIOT.

OK, we already established that KAP is the final authority when it comes to interpreting intelligence. Whatever those bullshitters have to say cannot possibly be right. Even this bullshitter named David Petraeus has no idea what he is talking about:

Seconldy, Libya was, and remains, a chaotic place replete with skilled, armed fighters. As former CIA Director General David Petraeus explained, these groups retained their weapons and therefore did not need a lot of lead time to prepare attacks. The sophistication of the attacks does not necessarily imply length pre-planning.

Posted by: Warren Porter at November 24, 2014 2:36 PM
Comment #386019

Warren, A hell of a lot more intelligence then some over educated college kid. No kidding Libya is chaotic it was when Reagan was President and probably before that and still is. I did read Rich’s comment and did comprehend but like you and I Rich is no expert either. Unlike you I don’t take things as Gospel especially from a spy organization like the CIA, they’re not going to tell you everything and if you believe they did I’d say you learned nothing in school. Warren, I do have Military experience unlike you and yes diversionary tactics are common and if you think the terror groups don’t use them then you are very naïve.

Posted by: Rich KAPitan at November 24, 2014 3:36 PM
Comment #386020

I’ve read more of the report and think this some kind of GOP setup on Hillary. This report takes all of the blame off of CIA, most of the blame of the Administration, and puts pretty much all of it on State. And who was Sec of State at the time?

So you’ve got the ball on the tee with the Select Committee report on deck.

Posted by: George in SC at November 24, 2014 3:59 PM
Comment #386023

The Benghazi fervor was over a long time ago unless you were a rabid right wing zealot however I am glad to see this posting detailing the information. I am not surprised that there are still hangers on wanting to yell at the top of their lungs “BENGHAZI”.

I am certain that this is going to come up again if Hillary Clinton decides to run for the 2016 Presidency but if she does not it will fade into the obscurity that it deserves. If it is used against Hillary, I do believe that the voting public will however see it for the ruse that it was all along and understand that the tragic death of Americans was never anything the opposition was to concerned with, what a pity.

Posted by: Speak4all at November 24, 2014 4:55 PM
Comment #386026
I’ve read more of the report and think this some kind of GOP setup on Hillary. This report takes all of the blame off of CIA, most of the blame of the Administration, and puts pretty much all of it on State. And who was Sec of State at the time?

I also assume the House Intelligence Committee protects their own (the CIA) as well. However, I’m certain Mike Rogers shed no tears over Clinton’s State Dept.

Speaks4all,

So much fun watching our friend in Cleveland burst from all the lies that conservative media has pumped inside his cranium, isn’t it? Just watch what unfolds below:

KAP,

A hell of a lot more intelligence then some over educated college kid.
I usually don’t nitpick over such things because I am aware that I make more than my share of grammatical and spelling errors. However, if I was feeling supercilious and wanted to write something praising my own intelligence while disparaging someone else’s I would do everything conceivable to make sure that I least write a complete sentence. You know, something with both a subject and a predicate. Otherwise, I would just end up looking foolish if I wrote just a fragment. Not to mention the fact that I would probably put something in there to explain what exactly has “more intelligence than some over-educated college kid”. However, I know how easy it is to look foolish when being haughty, so I’m going to get off this high horse as fast as I can before I get in trouble.
No kidding Libya is chaotic it was when Reagan was President and probably before that and still is.

I’m no expert here, but I know enough not to equate the current situation with what existed when Qaddafi was still in power. Libya was certainly antagonistic towards the US during the Reagan era and there were plenty of reasons to be wary it, but chaos wasn’t one of them. For all its faults, the Qaddafi regime was quite stable for most of its existence (especially during the ’80s). Instability and chaos are new features for Libya.

Unlike you I don’t take things as Gospel especially from a spy organization like the CIA, they’re not going to tell you everything.
Agreed, the CIA is not immune from lying to cover its ass. However, are they going to lie under oath to cover Obama’s ass? I don’t think that is as likely unless you can show me otherwise (corrupt quid pro quo between the CIA and Obama perhaps? Do you have proof of such?). Also, remember that this report comes from the House Intelligence Committee, which is distinct from the CIA itself. Namely in the aspect where the former oversees the latter.
I do have Military experience unlike you.
Yes, and that experiences has served you so well here. I still remember when you got upset that assets from all across the Mediterranean weren’t dispatched to rescue Stevens. Again, we turn to the Intelligence Committee Report; this time, to address the insights provided by your military experience:
When the Benghazi security team was ready to depart for the TMF, one officer twice suggested that it might be a good idea if there were a Spectre gunship and a surveillance flight in the air… A member of the security team who served in Tripoli four months earlier had inquired about the availability of air assets and believed a Spectre gunship was based and available in Sigonella, Italy. He assumed that it was available that night, though he admitted that it was not his job to know whether it was available. Those officers who had attended emergency action committee meetings had discussed intimately what, if any, US military resources were in the area. Those officers knew exactly what was and was not in the area, and they understood that there was no air support or any other assets in the general area. Once the aircraft carrier pulled out at the end of Operation Freedom Falcon, the officers knew air support was not in the area.

The lack of local air support was well-known. Indeed, an [censored] cable from CIA headquarters to personnel in Libya that predated the attacks explained that “the primary course of action for officers operating in Libya during a personnel recovery scenario should be to move away from enemy activity as there is no mechanism/authorities in place for the field to leverage Emergency Close Air Support. The Base should be prepared to recover its officer(s) with local resources within its capabilities and limitiations.

In other words, stop BSing us KAP. You have no clue what you are talking about.

As for diversionary tactics? Did you ever consider the possibility the attack in Benghazi may have been a diversion for an even greater attack later on? Perhaps this may explain why nobody dispatched aircraft from all across the entire Mediterranean Sea to a firefight that had already been lost.

Posted by: Warren Porter at November 24, 2014 6:20 PM
Comment #386034

Just think phx8, all this time you’ve had the secret to quieting him and you have just now used it. Great constraint !!

Posted by: jane doe at November 24, 2014 10:38 PM
Comment #386042

More of a clue than what you know Warren. No Warren the diversion was in Egypt, everybody was watching there and nobody paying attention to Libya. It ain’t rocket science junior. Yes the CIA would lie to cover Obama’s ass because they know he’d take a whole bunch of ass’s with him. As far as the intelligence report you quoted about the availability of assets refer to the prior sentence. Like I said it ain’t over yet they still have Gowdy to contend with.

Posted by: Rich KAPitan at November 24, 2014 11:10 PM
Comment #386047


“Like I said it ain’t over yet they still have Gowdy to contend with.”

And after Gowdy perhaps the right can bring in Sheriff Joe. He could drive his tank right up to the White House gates.

Or, perhaps he could send his crack team of investigators to Libya.

Surely there are some stones in the Libyan desert that are left unturned.

This is no longer an investigation, it’s a witch hunt, and the right won’t be satisfied.

Ever.

Rocky

Posted by: Rocky Marks at November 25, 2014 1:24 AM
Comment #386054

KAP is already a mile underground, but he refuses to stop digging. LOL!

Posted by: Warren Porter at November 25, 2014 8:42 AM
Comment #386074

Your right Rocky I won’t be satisfied until the TRUTH is finally told. Not the BULLS**T you and others like you believe from this Administration.

Posted by: Rich KAPitan at November 25, 2014 9:59 AM
Comment #386075

PS, You guys thought that Bush lied now how does it feel!!

Posted by: Rich KAPitan at November 25, 2014 10:02 AM
Comment #386108

Kap,

“Your right Rocky I won’t be satisfied until the TRUTH is finally told.”

Sorry, you don’t want the truth, you want Obama’s head on a pike.

After numerous investigations by the right that have gone against whatever you seem to believe…

“You guys thought that Bush lied now how does it feel!!”

One word… Perspective.

Rocky

Posted by: Rocky Marks at November 25, 2014 4:02 PM
Comment #386134

NO Rocky the TRUTH!!!!! I know it’s hard for you to believe that Obama may have lied, but it is a strong possibility.

Posted by: Rich KAPitan at November 25, 2014 10:08 PM
Comment #386139

Kap,

“NO Rocky the TRUTH!!!!! I know it’s hard for you to believe that Obama may have lied, but it is a strong possibility.”

What truth Kap… yours?

Perhaps you believe Obama drove these investigations. That his words came out of Mike Rogers’ mouth. Perhaps Emperor Obama has threatened Rogers’ family.

Here’s a “truth” for you;

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2012/sep/27/benghazi-attack-followed-deep-cuts-in-state-depart/#ixzz3K9MRrsUA

“Since 2010, Congress cut $296 million from the State Department’s spending request for embassy security and construction, with additional cuts in other State Department security accounts, according to an analysis by a former appropriations committee staffer.”

You want to put Obama in the room with a gun to Ambassador Stevens’ head so bad you can taste it.

The fact is that until the “truth” fits your narrative you cannot, and will not be satisfied.

Rocky

Posted by: Rocky Marks at November 26, 2014 12:42 AM
Comment #386143

Rocky refer to comment 386134

Posted by: Rich KAPitan at November 26, 2014 11:09 AM
Comment #386146

The report is based on the testimony of Morell, he was found to lie about the talking points blaming the FBI, now we’re supposed to believe the lier, fat chance Rocky.

Posted by: Rich KAPitan at November 26, 2014 1:48 PM
Comment #386180

Kap,

“Rocky refer to comment 386134”

OK let’s look at comment 386134.

“I know it’s hard for you to believe that Obama may have lied, but it is a strong possibility.”

The right throws words like “may have”, “might have”, “it’s a possibility”, even “it’s a “strong” possibility”, like confetti.
“You guys” on the right base your vast assumptions on half vast speculation.
I mean, why bother with the truth when rumor can trash your opponents even better.

Mark Twain said;

“A lie can travel half way around the world while the truth is putting on its shoes.”

Did Obama lie? Yes or no?
And if he did where is your proof?

Not might have, or may have, actual, factual proof?

Anything else is, as you say, bullshit.

Rocky

Posted by: Rocky Marks at November 27, 2014 1:17 PM
Comment #386181

Yes he lied Rocky, Obamacare for one. Lied about Benghazi one time says it’s terror related and then for 2 weeks it’s a video. He even told that in front of the UN it was a video. The only BULLS**T is from you Obama lovers that think he does no wrong and spin every phony statement that comes out of his mouth.

Posted by: Rich KAPitan at November 27, 2014 1:55 PM
Comment #386182

Kap,

We’re not talking about “Obamacare”.

Here is the text of the speech before the UN 9/25/12.

http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2012/09/25/remarks-president-un-general-assembly

Please feel free to point out exactly where Obama actually blamed the attack on the Bengazi Consulate, and the death of Ambassador Stevens on the video.

Rocky

Posted by: Rocky Marks at November 27, 2014 2:38 PM
Comment #386183

Rocky he did mention the video in the speech. We are talking about if Obama lied so I mentioned Obamacare for one. As far as Obama and the Video BULLS**T, The View comes to mind and other times in the first 2 weeks after the attack. Like I said it’s you Obama lovers that want spin all the phony crap that comes out of his mouth.

Posted by: Rich KAPitan at November 27, 2014 2:58 PM
Comment #386184

Kap,

“The only BULLS**T is from you Obama lovers that think he does no wrong and spin every phony statement that comes out of his mouth.”

Oh, and while you’re at it please also show all of us where I have come out in support of Obama or his policies.

I may have made comments about the hypocritical blatherings of those, like you, on the right, but I have never come out in support of Obama.

Rocky

Posted by: Rocky Marks at November 27, 2014 3:02 PM
Comment #386185

Rocky, The speech does mention the video. As far as you asking about lies I mentioned Obamacare as one. For 2 weeks the video was the big talking point out of the left wing, 5 talk shows Obama and the View and other times. As I said the only BULLS**T being spread here is from the left. Obama gives a speech at the U.N. in front of all the leaders who are members in attendance who know the attack was a terror attack and in this country he allows the video talking point to be played out for 2 weeks. What kind of idiots does the left think the people of this country are. You, Rocky may believe what comes out of the lying mouth of this so called president but I don’t along with over 50% of the people in this country. Spin it anyway you want Rocky but Obama is an incompetent president.

Posted by: Rich KAPitan at November 27, 2014 3:13 PM
Comment #386186

Kap,

“Rocky, The speech does mention the video.”

So… what you’re doing is extrapolating from the fact that because Obama made mention of the video in the speech, he blamed the video for the “attack”.

“He even told that in front of the UN it was a video.”

Those are your words, not mine, and for someone that claims to seek the truth this isn’t even close.

“We are talking about if Obama lied so I mentioned Obamacare for one.”

No, sorry, we are talking about Bengazi, not Obamacare.

This the way the right tries to steer the debate. You obfuscate and change the subject to suit your narrative. I specifically asked you to provide proof of your assertion that Obama lied about Bengazi and you change the subject to the point of calling me an Obama appologist.

Here’s the truth.

There have now been multiple investigations, the latest from the House Intelligence Committee, headed by a Republican, whose findings absolve the administration, and you say it is all a lie.

And, oh, BTW, you still can’t provide any proof about the administration lying about Bengazi or you would have already.

I would submit that you cannot supply any proof because there is none.

Rocky

Posted by: Rocky Marks at November 27, 2014 5:17 PM
Comment #386187

I didn’t change the subject Rocky, you asked about Obama’s lies, I gave you one of 250+. It’s your prerogative if you want to believe the BULLS**T findings of the Intel committee.

Posted by: Rich KAPitan at November 27, 2014 7:17 PM
Comment #386188

This whole Benghazi “scandal” now boils down to whether the mixed fundamentalist groups’ attack on the consulate at Benghazi was pre-planned for a year, month, week, day or minutes and whether the video had any motivational function. Pathetic!

Posted by: Rich at November 27, 2014 9:49 PM
Comment #386282

Kap

“I didn’t change the subject Rocky, you asked about Obama’s lies, I gave you one of 250+.”

Yeah, you did. I asked for proof if Obama lied about Bengazi and you brought up Obamacare.
It appears that Bengazi is a mere sideshow in the right’s “I hate Obama and I think he is the antichrist” circus.
Occam’s Razor suggests that among competing hypotheses, the one with the fewest assumptions should be selected.

Apparently, you believe the guy with the most assumptions wins.

Rocky

Posted by: Rocky Marks at November 30, 2014 3:32 PM
Post a comment