The Latest from The Lady
- #DM7 Article: It Begins: Common Core Syndrome
- DPI’s Atkinson Unleashes Fear Mongering Rhetoric On Vouchers
- SHOCKER: Volunteer Arrestee Found Guilty
- Romeike Family Asylum Update – SCOTUS Orders DOJ To Respond
- #DM7 Week 2: The New Tone Of Common Core
- New Indictment Against James E. Dutschke for Second Frame Attempt
- It’s That Time Of Year Again – Annual Blog Vay-Cay!
- He Who Controls The Data, Controls The People?
- Mayor of Crazy Town Updates: You know what’s gonna happen…
- Albuquerque: A City’s Historic Vote on a 20 Week Late Term Abortion Ban
Past Musings from The Lady
Tag Archives: State Department
Ten months of stonewalling later, a survivor of Benghazi has finally been spoken to.
A survivor of the attack on Benghazi has been located and spoke with FOX news. David Ubben risked his own life to save others, including recovering the body of Sean Smith and assisting Glen Doherty and Tyrone Woods on the roof of the annex that night. Ubben is still recovering from injuries sustained that night at Walter Reed Medical Center.
Read more… Continue reading
The State Department dragged its feet in producing witnesses requested in May by the Oversight committee, resulting in Subpoenas in June. Of late, the request for Colonel Bristol of AFRICOM to appear was rebuffed. The Pentagon stated he was retired and not compelled to testify. This statement has turned out to be a lie, or as the Pentagon is now calling it — an ‘administrative error’. The Colonel has been found.
Read more… Continue reading
FOX news is reporting that some of the whistleblower witness names have been revealed:
Appearing before the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee will be three career State Department officials: Gregory N. Hicks, the deputy chief of mission at the U.S. Embassy in Libya at the time of the Benghazi terrorist attacks; Mark I. Thompson, a former Marine and now the deputy coordinator for Operations in the agency’s Counterterrorism Bureau; and Eric Nordstrom, a diplomatic security officer who was the regional security officer in Libya, the top security officer in the country in the months leading up to the attacks.
Liberty Speaks put together a list of potential names last month after Darrell Issa fired his warning shot for various agencies to ‘lawyer up’. Our list is based on the staff list in Tripoli from 9/12/12 and from the various cables made public.
Hicks is on the list of staff for Tripoli, Thompson and Nordstrom are not. Also, neither Nordstrom nor Hicks appears in either the alphabetical bio listing or ‘other bio’ listings at the State Department site. Not surprising on Nordstrom, but isn’t Hicks supposed to be a diplomat? I can’t find Hicks by title either. More on Hicks low visibility at the State Department below.
Here is what we have so far: 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