A.P Dillon on Social Media
Got PayPal? Donate Today!
Donate Other Ways
Got News? Get the Newsletter.
LATEST LL1885 POSTS
- Onslow County middle school teacher arrested for indecent liberties with students
- Morehead City area teacher arrested for sexual battery
- #WCPSS Updates: More OEA Holiday lesson nonsense and parents protest student reassignment
- #NCED Updates: NCAE hides membership again, a Renewal School District Explainer, General Assembly updates & more
- Guilford County Teacher charged with rape of student; held on $2.5M bond
- Durham teacher charged with attempting to kill husband with a knife
- Elizabeth Warren called out by #SchoolChoice Parents at Rally
ARCHIVES BY CATEGORY
Category Archives: CIA
Last week we were told by CBS news via a ‘source’ that Susan Rice’s talking points were edited by them. That was a lie and we all knew it.
Breitbart, emphasis added:
Last week, former CIA Chief Davis Petraeus testified that within a day he knew the assault on our consulate in Benghazi was a premeditated terrorist attack committed by a Libyan militia with ties to al-Qaeda. As a result, Petraeus authorized the release of this information to the public in talking points to be given to the White House and to lawmakers. CBS News reports that references to al-Qaeda were later removed by Office of the Director of National Intelligence (DNI) — an agency run by James Clapper, an Obama appointee. The FBI also made substantial edits.
But here’s where the plot thickens.
DNI spokesman Shawn Turner told CBS News, “The intelligence community assessed from the very beginning that what happened in Benghazi was a terrorist attack.” He added that this classified information was shared with the White House. CBS News then quite correctly concludes that, as a member of Obama’s cabinet, Susan Rice would would’ve known this. All cabinet members are given classified briefings.
The bottom line, then, is that during her Sunday show appearances, Rice knew the information she was spreading was false.
The rest of the article echoes what I said last week — this proclamation that the talking points were edited for Rice by the DNI is just another lie. I contend this administration is intentionally muddying the waters. The Oversight committee cannot allow this to drag on as they did with Fast and Furious. An independent counsel must be assigned.
The claims of racism and sexism with regard to questioning Susan Rice’s competency are the standard Democrat response to any controversy they are questioned on, however the loudness and pervasiveness of their claims this time show their level of desperation. Just what else does this woman have to hide besides purposefully lying to the American people? The Democrats, and now their lap dog media, want Benghazi to go away and they want us all to shut up already. (Related: WaPo Plays The Race Card)
Related Reading: Doug Ross – CIA talking points edited by White House Continue reading
From Nice Deb:
For Some Reason, The White House Refuses To Release Photos Taken of WH Officials During 9/11 Benghazi Attacks
Interesting. On Oct.31, CBS News requested images of US officials taken in the White House on 9/11 and those requests have been denied by the White House Photo Office. As the always stellar Sharyl Attkisson notes, Obama stated during his press conference on Nov. 14, that his Administration has provided all information regarding “what happened in Benghazi.”
In the past, the White House has released photos showing US officials during national security incidents. A half dozen images related to the mission that captured and killed Osama bin Laden were given to the public last year. One depicts President Obama, Vice President Joe Biden, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and members of the national security team gathered in the Situation Room on May 1, 2011.
Think there’ll be any photos from the situation room on 9/11/2012 of Obama officials watching US citizens in Benghazi getting slaughtered in real time, and doing nothing about it?
There is a lot more, including the White House blowing off multiple requests for more details. Go read it.
Meanwhile, you can browse the album I made of the White House Situation room:
[youtube=http://youtu.be/AvE0QsSZHTk] Continue reading
This just in… The Office of DNI has voluntarily offered themselves up to be thrown under the bus regarding the “Benghazi talking points”. James Clapper, of ‘mostly secular’ fame, is laying down in the middle of the road. Via Hot Air, emphasis added is mine:
Meet James Clapper — the latest fall guy for the White House on Benghazi. After last week’s hearings in Congress showed that the talking points from the CIA had been changed to eliminate the mention of terrorism, Washington erupted into a whodunit.
CBS News has learned that the Office of the Director of National Intelligence (DNI) cut specific references to “al Qaeda” and “terrorism” from the unclassified talking points given to Ambassador Susan Rice on the Benghazi consulate attack – with the agreement of the CIA and FBI. The White House or State Department did not make those changes.
However, an intelligence source tells CBS News correspondent Margaret Brennan the links to al Qaeda were deemed too “tenuous” to make public, because there was not strong confidence in the person providing the intelligence. CIA Director David Petraeus, however, told Congress he agreed to release the information — the reference to al Qaeda — in an early draft of the talking points, which were also distributed to select lawmakers.
“The intelligence community assessed from the very beginning that what happened in Benghazi was a terrorist attack.” DNI spokesman Shawn Turner tells CBS News. That information was shared at a classified level — which Rice, as a member of President Obama’s cabinet, would have been privy to. …
The head of the DNI is James Clapper, an Obama appointee. He ultimately did review the points, before they were given to Ambassador Rice and members of the House intelligence committee on Sept. 14. They were compiled the day before.
Note that this report doesn’t pin the blame on Clapper himself. It instead locates the change in Clapper’s “office,” allowing for a rather non-specific assignment that makes almost no sense at all. Are we to believe that a Clapper aide overruled David Petraeus’ assessment of Benghazi? If so, on what basis?
There is more. Go read it.
September 14th they were approved? Those must be magic talking points as I’d like to point out Carney was already using the video talking points before September 14th, as were Hillary Clinton and Obama himself:[youtube=http://youtu.be/WBHJnQnySZY]
Even if they were ‘compiled’ the day before, Clinton was using them on the 13th. Obama used them on the 12th. Clapper if full of crap. This is all besides the point and yet another one of this administration’s manufactured distractions. It makes no difference what talking points were given to whom and when; this White House approved them and sent Rice out with the. On top of that, Carney, Clinton and Obama himself all used them as well. The truth was known within hours and yet this President and his administration purposefully deceived the nation for three weeks. The President even went in front of the United Nations and lied.
Enough with the games. Enough with the lies. This administration is rotten to the core. Assign the independent counsel. Continue reading
Transparency! Interesting what 24 hours can yield.
Yesterday: White House denies they altered the Benghazi talking points.
Today: White House being busted for lying about altering the Benghazi talking points.
SUSAN RICE, ABANDONED BY DANA MILBANK, AND NOW BY MAUREEN DOWD: “Rice should have been wary of a White House staff with a tendency to gild the lily…
Turn Off The Heat, You May Boil The Rice? Continue reading
Post written by Liberty Speaks. Original may be found here.
So on November 13th, President Obama, after winning re-election held his first news conference in 8 months. It wasn’t until the eleventh question asked that the attack on Benghazi came up. The question was not about the lack or denial of security requests, it wasn’t about the stand down order from the CIA to the two former Navy SEALS who ultimately lost their lives while protecting the consulate and the annex, it wasn’t about the fact that the White House had real time intelligence that the attack was pre-planned and perpetrated by Al Qaeda, nor was it about the ignored calls for help from those on the ground who never received that help. No, instead of all those questions that all of us seem to want the answers to, the question to the President was about the attacks on….wait for it…..Ambassador Susan Rice and the possible nomination of her for the Secretary of State position. What came next was nothing short of a stunning exposition of playground tactics and a strange revelation. First, here is the question from Jonathan Karl (video of the comments here):
“Thank you, Mr. President. Senator John McCain and Senator Lindsey Graham both said today that they want to have Watergate-style hearings on the attack on the U.S. consulate in Benghazi and said that if you nominate Susan Rice to be secretary of state, they will do everything in their power to block her nomination. As Senator Graham said, he simply doesn’t trust Ambassador Rice after what she said about Benghazi. I’d like your reaction to that. And would those threats deter you from making a nomination like that?”
Now, here is the Presidents response:
“Well, first of all, I’m not going to comment at this point on various nominations that I’ll put forward to fill out my Cabinet for the second term. Those are things that are still being discussed.
But let me say specifically about Susan Rice, she has done exemplary work. She has represented the United States and our interests in the United Nations with skill and professionalism and toughness and grace. As I’ve 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. If Senator McCain and Senator Graham and others want to go after somebody, they should go after me. And I’m happy to have that discussion with them. But for them to go after the U.N. ambassador, who had nothing to do with Benghazi and was simply making a presentation based on intelligence that she had received and to besmirch her reputation is outrageous.”
President Obama’s defense of Ambassador Rice, was commendable, how ever he truly did her a disservice. He acted like a playground defender of a victim of bullies when stating that Senators McCain and Graham should go after him instead of her. Then basically labeled Susan Rice as a small player in the scheme of things by stating she “gave her best” understanding of the intelligence that had been provided her, and was simply making a “Presentation” but “had nothing to do with Benghazi”.
KEEP READING —> Continue reading
I think there are going to be a lot of backpedaling Democrats and Lefty talking heads. I wonder if Nancy Pelosi and her troop of ‘women for Susan Rice’ will acknowledge the news or just stick their heads in their ladyparts and yell ‘LA LA LA LA CAN’T HEAR YOU!’.
It’s sexist, no matter what to this cabal of Julias who are setting women back about 60 years. None of their complaints explains why she was sent out there in the first place. We’ll come back to the Democrats and their closing ranks around Rice again in this post.
But all of their protesting, race card playing and cries of sexism, as well as Obama’s indignant defending the Damsel in distress act, are for naught. Petraeus testified yesterday and he pretty much put the buck back on Obama’s desk.
BOOM: President told within 72 hours Benghazi attack linked to al-Qaida extremists
Excerpt emphasis added:
U.S. intelligence told President Barack Obama and senior administration officials within 72 hours of the Benghazi tragedy that the attack was likely carried out by local militia and other armed extremists sympathetic to al-Qaida in the region, officials directly familiar with the information told the Washington Guardian on Friday.
KEEP READING —> Continue reading
Former CIA director David Petraeus, who resigned last week after an FBI investigation revealed that he had been conducting an extramarital affair with his biographer, will voluntarily testify before congressional panels investigating the September terrorist attack in Benghazi, according to a new report from Fox News.
Patraeus was set to testify this week about the attack, which claimed the lives of four Americans including the U.S. Ambassador to Libya. But after his resignation, acting CIA Director Mike Morell is set to appear in his place at the closed-door hearing Thursday afternoon.
Well, if he didn’t do it voluntarily, there was a plan to subpoena him anyway. Further down in the same article from The Hill, emphasis mine:
Other Congressional leaders had indicated that they could subpoena Petraeus if he declined to testify. White House Press Secretary Jay Carney said Tuesday that the president had no say in whether Petraeus should testify.
“Well, I would say two things — one, that it is up to Congress to make decisions about who is called to testify,” Carney said. “But the President is confident that Acting Director Morell is fully informed and capable of representing the CIA in a hearing about the incidents in Benghazi.”
The President has no say in who testifies and is confident in Morrell being “fully informed”? No kidding! Someone is actually “fully informed” on Benghazi in this administration? What a shocker since various tentacles of this administration all are telling variations of what went down there after being busted for lying about a video on YouTube for three weeks and tossing the creator of said video in jail for ‘parole violations’. If one reads that statement from the viewpoint the White House is annoyed Petraeus will indeed testify, then their statement looks more like “Hey, believe Morrell since he’s our guy now.”
Enough with this movie of the week type sideshow. This administration’s penchant for the use of shiny objects to distract from the bigger issues at hand is well-known. The state-run media is only too happy to assist. My instinct is this resignation was not kept from the White House or the President, but held until it was convenient. This administration can’t tell me that Clapper conveniently found out about the investigation and then turned around and asked for the resignation on Election day at 5pm and then didn’t tell the President until the next day. It’s a little bit hard to believe that this administration is trying to suggest that the President would not know that the highest ranking member of the CIA was being asked to resign or, at bare minimum, the fact Petraeus was investigated by the FBI. If it is to be believed that an investigation this big was kept from the President, then who is really running this country? An empty chair?
Sideshows involving twins, shirtless FBI agents and Four Star Generals diddling socialites and novice novelists be damned– FOUR AMERICANS WERE MURDERED and tomorrow, testimony begins whether the President, White House and media like it or not.
Both Petraeus and Allen helped in Kelley’s sister’s Custody battle – NY Post
Althouse has more comments on the NY Post piece.
Obama eyes John Kerry for Defense Secretary – WaPo Continue reading