Infidels

[patric]

[Teatownclown]

What's sad about it? I mean, other than 4 Americans being killed on the anniversary of 9/11 and our prez though "Vegas Baby!" was more important. Even the WaPo is asking questions now.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/david-ignatius-benghazi-questions-the-administration-must-answer/2012/10/30/02d02538-22e2-11e2-8448-81b1ce7d6978_story.html

[nathanm]

What a shocker. That boulder Fox has been trying to push up bullshit mountain just rolled back and crushed them:

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/11/02/world/africa/cia-played-major-defensive-role-in-libya-attack.html

[heironymouspasparagus]

What a shocker. That boulder Fox has been trying to push up bullshit mountain just rolled back and crushed them:

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/11/02/world/africa/cia-played-major-defensive-role-in-libya-attack.html

I listened to an in depth version of this on NPR on the way home.  Since that is one of the things they do so well....

And it just highlights how Fox - spelled "MurdochianFantasyWorld" intentionally lies about everything.  And yet, so many still subscribe to "The Script" and drink the Fool-Aid (obviously a morphing of Fox Kool-Aid).

[Gaspar]

So, in his presser today the president said that Susan Rice was "sent by the White House" to brief the press based on information they provided.

"As I said before, she made an appearance at the request of the White House in which she gave her best understanding of the intelligence that had been provided to her,"

That clears that up, but begs the question, why would the White House ask the Ambassador to the UN to carry out a function of the Secretary of State?

. . .and why not provide her access to the intelligence from the CIA and State Department beforehand?

The only answer to both questions that I can think of is to separate the administration from acknowledging a terrorist attack and delaying media scrutiny durring an election, in exchange for the Secretary of State position after the election.

Pure Chicago, but perhaps too transparent.  It's been two months and this thing is still evolving.

[nathanm]

You're treading dangerously close to troofer territory again, Gaspar.

[Gaspar]

You're treading dangerously close to troofer territory again, Gaspar.

Perhaps you are right.  They were aware that SS Clinton was planning on leaving after the election.  Perhaps they were simply giving Ambassador Rice a tryout.  Seems to have gone splendidly, wouldn't you agree?

[Townsend]

McCain skips Benghazi briefing, gets testy when questioned by CNN



http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2012/11/15/mccain-skips-benghazi-briefing-gets-testy-when-questioned-by-cnn/

(CNN) - Most of the Republican members of a Senate committee investigating the terrorist attack at the U.S. consulate in Benghazi, Libya, skipped an important classified briefing by administration officials on the incident Wednesday, CNN has learned.

The missing lawmakers included Sen. John McCain of Arizona, who at the time of the top-secret briefing held a press conference in the Capitol to call for the creation of a Watergate-type special Congressional committee to investigate how and why the attack took place.

– Follow the Ticker on Twitter: @PoliticalTicker

McCain, who has accused President Barack Obama of not telling the truth about the Benghazi attack, said that even though there are several committees involved in the probe, only a select committee could streamline the information flow and resolve the "many unanswered questions" about the tragedy.

When CNN approached McCain in a Capitol hallway Thursday morning, the senator refused to comment about why he missed the briefing, which was conducted by top diplomatic, military and counter-terrorism officials. Instead, McCain got testy when pressed to say why he wasn't there.

"I have no comment about my schedule and I'm not going to comment on how I spend my time to the media," McCain said.

Asked why he wouldn't comment, McCain grew agitated: "Because I have the right as a senator to have no comment and who the hell are you to tell me I can or not?"

When CNN noted that McCain had missed a key meeting on a subject the senator has been intensely upset about, McCain said, "I'm upset that you keep badgering me."

While McCain refused to shed light on why he didn't show, his spokesman Brian Rogers emailed CNN a short time later with an explanation. He blamed it on a "scheduling error" but wouldn't provide any more detail.

According to a Democratic aide on the Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee, only three of the eight GOP members of the committee attended the two hour briefing that ran from 11 a.m. to 1 p.m. ET. By contrast, seven of the nine Democratic members were there.

McCain's press conference took place at noon.

[nathanm]

I like it when the Republicans show how serious they really are.

[Townsend]

I like it when the Republicans show how serious they really are.

"Damned facts getting in my way all the time."

[Teatownclown]

Sore loser....bitter old soldier.

[Conan71]

McCain skips Benghazi briefing, gets testy when questioned by CNN



http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2012/11/15/mccain-skips-benghazi-briefing-gets-testy-when-questioned-by-cnn/

Give him a break, probably needed his Geritol and a nap.

[Gaspar]

Petraeus said that the intelligence briefing documents the CIA provided the White House did indeed mention the Al Qaeda connection, but were obviously edited before being delivered to Rice.

http://mrctv.org/videos/king-petraeus-said-cias-talking-points-were-edited-play-down-terrorism

So, now I guess the search is for whoever edited the documents and why?

Now that the White House knows that intelligence documents were altered, I'm sure they are furious and doing everything within their power to get to the bottom of this!

Perhaps it was someone who didn't want to cancel a Vegas fundraiser?  I dono? 

[Townsend]

Petraeus said that the intelligence briefing documents the CIA provided the White House did indeed mention the Al Qaeda connection, but were obviously edited before being delivered to Rice.

http://mrctv.org/videos/king-petraeus-said-cias-talking-points-were-edited-play-down-terrorism

That's not Patraeus

We've told you you shouldn't trust Fox news.

[Townsend]

Guest on Fox News to Discuss Benghazi Attack Is Given a Quick Exit

http://mediadecoder.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/11/26/guest-on-fox-news-to-discuss-benghazi-attack-is-given-a-quick-exit/?smid=tw-share

Thomas E. Ricks, the veteran defense reporter and author, said he expected his Monday morning appearance on Fox News to last about three minutes. It ended, in fact, after 90 seconds — his last sentence was a description of the network as "a wing of the Republican Party."

After the interview, a Fox News staffer told Mr. Ricks that he had been rude.

The strange and unusually short interview segment quickly gained the attention of media critics, because criticism of Fox News is rarely aired on Fox News. Mr. Hicks said in an e-mail message afterward that he did not think he was being rude. "I thought I was being honest," he said. "They asked my opinion, and I gave it."

The topic was the attack on the United States's diplomatic compound in Benghazi, Libya. Before being thanked and sent on his way, Mr. Hicks said he thought the controversy around the attack was "hyped, by this network especially."

Fox News has devoted far more airtime to the events in Benghazi, on Sept. 11, than other television news networks, with numerous suggestions that the Obama administration is engaged in a cover-up. Erik Wemple of The Washington Post and the anti-Fox group Media Matters, among others, have documented the ups and downs of Fox's reporting on the subject.

"Right now, pressure mounting on the Obama administration over its response to the deadly attack on our consulate in Benghazi," the Fox anchor Jon Scott said before tossing to Mr. Ricks, a former Washington Post and Wall Street Journal reporter whose latest book, "The Generals," was published last month.

After Mr. Ricks said that he thought that "Benghazi generally was hyped, by this network especially," Mr. Scott homed in on the word "hype," asking, "When you have four people dead, including the first U.S. ambassador in more than 30 years, how do you call that hype?"

Mr. Ricks answered, "How many security contractors died in Iraq? Do you know?"

Mr. Scott said he did not know.

"Nobody does, because nobody cared," Mr. Ricks said. "We know that several hundred died, but there was never an official count done of security contractors dead in Iraq. So when I see this focus on what was essentially a small firefight, I think, No. 1, I've covered a lot of firefights, it's impossible to figure out what happens in them sometimes. And second, I think that the emphasis on Benghazi has been extremely political, partly because Fox was operating as a wing of the Republican Party."

That was the end of the segment.

"Alright, Tom Ricks, thank you very much for joining us today," Mr. Scott said before his co-anchor tossed to a commercial break.

Mr. Ricks said in his e-mail that "I think the segment was about half as long as planned." In the pre-interview with the producer in charge of the segment, Mr. Ricks expressed his point of view that the Benghazi controversy had been over-covered, "so they shouldn't have been surprised when they pushed back on that, and I defended my position," he said.

The producer, whom Mr. Ricks did not name, told him beforehand that he'd also have a chance to talk about the lack of combat readiness of some Army units, a subject he wrote a blog post about last Friday. "But they seemed to lose interest in that," he said.

Mr. Ricks added, "One reason I spoke the way I did is that the hero of my new book is George Marshall, the Army chief of staff during World War II. He got his position by speaking truth to power, and I try to follow that example."

A Fox News spokeswoman did not immediately respond to a request for comment about whether the interview segment was cut short.

There's a possibility it was supposed to be a 90 second segment (in a musical tone) buuuuuut I dooooouuuuubt iiiiiit.