Best Early Morning News Links
The Latest from The Lady
- When Liberals On Twitter Attack
- Sen. Kay Hagan (D-odge, NC)
- Ricin Letters Update: Dutschke Evaded the FBI
- NCGA House Passes Bill Banning Foreign Law
- #IRS Scandal: Obama Admin Knew In 2012; Possible Catalyst Letter In 2010
- DOJ Refuses Asylum to German Family Persecuted For Homeschooling
- NC Dem Meltdown Update: Now In Costume
- #BlogCon2013: This is BlogCon (video and Images)
- Democrats Are Melting Down In NC
- #BlogCon2013 – Thank You FreedomWorks and The Blaze!
Past Musings from The Lady
Search Results for: nakoula
From Jim Treacher:
By the way, the guy who made the YouTube video that didn’t cause Benghazi just got a year in jail
I realize it doesn’t matter anymore, if it ever did. But it’s worth at least a footnote in the glorious annals of the Obama administration.
The filmmaker behind “Innocence of Muslims,” the anti-Islam film that sparked rioting across the globe*, was sentenced Wednesday to a year behind bars after he admitted to violating the terms of his release from an earlier conviction.
[Name withheld because this is bullshit] admitted to four violations, including lying to his probation officer and using bogus names. In exchange, prosecutors dropped four other counts, which included allegations that [he] lied to federal authorities in telling them his role in the film’s production was limited to writing the script.
*SNIP* You will have to go to Treacher’s post and read his spot on comments.
I may be on break, but I’m not letting this story go. By the way, House & Senate convening a hearing on Benghazi and it’s set for the 15th.
The Friday Focus: Freedom of Speech in Obama’s America Continue reading
afely tucked away and silenced. That’s where.
Washington Times: PICKET: Anti-Muslim filmmaker detained for almost a month…next court date three days after election
Nakoula Basseley Nakoula, the 55-year-old filmmaker responsible for the anti-Muslim video that President Barack Obama, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, and U.N. Ambassador Susan Rice initially and wrongly blamed for inciting the deadly terrorist attack on the U.S. diplomatic mission in Benghazi, is still being held at the Los Angeles Metropolitan Detention Center (MDC) without bond.
It has been almost one month since Mr. Nakoula was arrested for allegedly violating the terms of his probation for a 2010 bank-fraud conviction. According to reports, under his probation, Mr. Nakoula was prohibited from using computers and the internet without supervision. According to ABC News:
Nakoula had met with federal probation officers on Sept. 14 about whether his involvement in the film violated the terms of his probation, which barred him from accessing the internet without prior approval and from using any name other than his legal name.
Nakoula told authorities he was involved in the film and asked law enforcement for help in regards to death threats he received since the film surfaced online.
“Nakoula was ordered detained — held without bond — by a federal judge, who determined he posed a flight risk,” said Thom Mrozek of the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Central District of California.
Mr. Nakoula’s next court date is on November 9, three days after the presidential election. In the meantime, while the Obama administration passes blame around over who dropped the ball with the attack in Benghazi, Mr. Nakoula remains locked up and muzzled in a Los Angeles detention center until after the ballots for president are counted on November 6. Continue reading
The YouTube video was a non-event in Libya.”
The hearing on Benghazi today shed a bit of light on what did and did not happen the night our mission in Libya was attacked by terrorists, killing four Americans. The proceedings opened up with Representative Cummings launching an attack on the witnesses before they had even uttered a word. It was incredibly distasteful and rather dumb. Watch Cummings for yourself:
[youtube=http://youtu.be/wNkAcPx0sYo] Continue reading
In an advance issue of The Weekly Standard titled The Benghazi Talking Points, Stephen Hayes lays out new evidence that members of the Obama administration actively lied about who was responsible for the death of four Americans. The Weekly Standard has obtained emails detailing how high level officials made changes to the CIA talking points, effectively erasing Al Qaeda from the picture.
“The discussions involved senior officials from the State Department, the National Security Council, the CIA, the Office of the Director of National Intelligence, and the White House.”
This is a very detailed and long article with a lot of unwritten questions in it. Questions I will pose here, so I urge you to read it all before proceeding with the remained of this post.
In the first page of the article, Hayes says that there were emails turned over that had ‘stipulations’. The section, with emphasis added:
“The White House provided the emails to members of the House and Senate intelligence committees for a limited time and with the stipulation that the documents were available for review only and would not be turned over to the committees. The White House and committee leadership agreed to that arrangement as part of a deal that would keep Republican senators from blocking the confirmation of John Brennan, the president’s choice to run the CIA. If the House report provides an accurate and complete depiction of the emails, it is clear that senior administration officials engaged in a wholesale rewriting of intelligence assessments about Benghazi in order to mislead the public.”
Why an emphasis on Brennan? This administration has stonewalled, lied and spun Benghazi for over seven months. Suddenly now they turn these emails over, making Brennan part of the deal? Of all the things the White House could ask for, they ask for Brennan to be confirmed for CIA? Why? Was it to ensure that someone would be in place to protect this administration’s narrative on Benghazi and the President’s alleged non-role in decision making that night?
Bear in mind that the active head of the CIA at the time of the attacks was Petraeus. The scandal surrounding Petraeus’ affair was kept on the backburner until after the election, but put into public view last year on November 7th when Petraeus resigned. It it plausible the timing was coincidence, however more likely the administration wished to keep him from testifying, as well as keep Benghazi out of the limelight until after the election – although he did testify at a later date. By then the media had everyone focused on the scandal and not Petraeus’ role at the CIA and Benghazi.
In fact, it was Mike Morrell who would end up testifying for Petraeus in closed door sessions first – the same one that The Weekly Standard article cites as being the one who changed the talking points: Continue reading