Susan Rice center of Unmasking-gate

Washington Free Beacon

Susan Rice, former President Barack Obama’s national security adviser, reportedly requested on several occasions the identities of “masked” U.S. persons in intelligence reports linked to President Trump’s transition and campaign. The revelation contradicts Rice’s past comments on March 22, when she claimed she knew “nothing” about the intelligence reports.

White House lawyers discovered Rice’s dozens of requests last month, during a National Security Council review of the “government’s policy on ‘unmasking’ the identities of individuals in the U.S. who are not targets of electronic eavesdropping, but whose communications are collected incidentally,” Eli Lake of Bloomberg reported Monday, citing U.S. officials.

But Rice, who Newsweek once called Obama’s “right-hand woman,” denied during a PBS interview last month having any knowledge of the intelligence community’s alleged incidental surveillance of Trump’s transition team.

http://freebeacon.com/national-security/flashback-susan-rice-said-i-know-nothing-unmasking-trump-officials/

Why does that make perfect sense?

The person who in 2012 told every major news network that a video caused the Benghazi attack. Obama’s Legacy of Lies’ right-hand deceiver.

No-cred Morrell hallucinates in interview on Benghazi

What a stooge, Mike Morrell. Or as Red State so eloquently put it:

Why Morrell chose to set his credibility on fire and masturbate while dancing around it over this [Benghazi video] issue is a mystery that I’ll leave to psychiatrists to sort out.

More: http://www.redstate.com/streiff/2016/08/07/former-cia-director-mike-morrell-lying-liar-video/

Well, that about sums up Mike-the super CIA director-Morrell in his supporting role for Hillary Clinton. Morrell is just a shill for Hillary, seems to be a lot of that going around.

Sickening!

H/T to Red State

Backfire: first 2016 prez debate

Sure no matter what, everyone seems to think Trump didn’t do as well as he should have. Fair criticism. He did leave an awful lot on the table — more like a smorgasbord. I think there is more than enough room for a backfire, or blow back as it may be.

Well, so much material to work with on Hillary. What was up for grabs on the table?

Travelgate
Email Server
Benghazi
Senate run 2000 fundraising
Wall St speeches
Pay to play
Foundation connections
Ethics.
Clinton Foundation — her home away from home. Shutdown issues and ethics.
Whitewater — their premier scandal
Cattle futures were very, very good to her
FBI Background Scandal — collecting and using information on opponents.
Hillary speeches were anything but free – follow the money — 11 mil in one year.
Broken promises and shattered ceilings
DNC scandal — leading to firing DWS and resignations. Politics of no choice.
Above the law
Norman Hsu Scandal and Jorge Cabrera Scandal
Damagegate to the White House — returning many things.
Records — always, the continual cover-up of her records… and her Record
Iraq vote — she actually had one, which she promptly ran away from thereafter and in her first presidential bid.
Russian reset — failure and her central focus. Getting translation wrong was not the only failure.
Reset to Red Scare
Libya and her failed mission in Benghazi.
Failed state policy on Libya
Egypt — walk like a Mo-Bro Egyptian.
Judgement disaster – this one could be disastergate.
Support Iran Deal — touts it as one of her signature achievements
TPP — she can run but she cannot hide her glowing endorsement for it.
Refusal to label Boko Haram
Her cozy partnership with Muslim Brotherhood.
Support for Refugee increases
Many lies of Hillary — she was within the law while breaking it.
Her passivity on Terrorism
Her attack on women — more like war on women. Failure to stand up for women.
Foreign Clinton Foundation donors while she endorsed beneficial policies.
Her responsibility Deficit — always claims to take responsibility, then never does.
A history of scandal and corruption — unfit and unqualified, lawfully prevented

 

Even Germany’s Angela Merkel says she wishes she could roll back time.– in regret for the refugee policy and problems. Hillary never learns, she’s irredeemable and incorrigible.

But then 11 hours of testimony to Congress on Benghazi couldn’t even put a dent in Hillary’s contemptible Libyan legacy. Nothing covers her server emailgate either.

Now the debate of so many missed opportunities. However, nothing made the Clinton record go away. She cannot delete that. Bleach-It cannot remove that stain. So it’s all still hanging like a cloud over Hillary Clinton. They did not disappear.

RightRing | Bullright

Benghazi select committee stonewalled

The Benghazi attack happened a few months before the 2012 Election. Now four years later, with a few months left in his term, the administration continues to run out the clock on the Select Committees investigation. We still don’t know what Obama was doing or what exactly Hillary did.

Trey Gowdy Levels Criticism Against Obama’s State Department

“Its justifications…are imaginary.”Western Journalism

The Committee, chaired by Rep. Trey Gowdy, R-S.C., has been seeking emails and records from former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and her senior staff at the State Department for over one year, including the findings of an Accountability Review Board but has yet to receive anything substantial.

“Whatever the administration is hiding, its justifications for doing so are imaginary and appear to be invented for the sake of convenience. That’s not how complying with a congressional subpoena works, and it’s well past time the department stops stonewalling,” he said.

More: Trey Gowdy Levels Criticism Against Obama’s State Department

“There is only one reason why these facts are now available to the American people: thorough congressional oversight, including the Select Committee on Benghazi’s insistence that any truly comprehensive review of what happened before, during, and after the 2012 terrorist attacks in Libya must include public records from the former Secretary of State and her senior staff,” said Gowdy.

“If anyone wonders why the investigation is not yet complete, the malfeasance and numerous problems identified in this report are Exhibit A, and prove the committee has faced serial delays from Day One at the hands of public officials who sought to avoid transparency and accountability,” added Gowdy.

We’re set to go into another election, four years later, without critical answers. At this point, to expect the answers or accountability from Obama’s administration would require the willing suspension of disbelief.

Maybe we will not get the answers but only an explanation as to why we didn’t get the answers or accountability.

Hillary Wrong for America

Clinton failed in office. Now she is spewing critique about what it takes to fulfill the duties of office. Her candidacy requires the willing suspense of disbelief. Lying is her moral duty.

Now it is surreal, Hillary making a speech on national security. Is that an oxymoron? Billed as a foreign policy speech, but it wasn’t. It was a political campaign attack speech.

She claimed to be right there in the situation room as Obama made the decision on Bin Laden. Well, I was in the room when my son was born but it doesn’t mean I gave birth to him. See that’s the thing, she’s like a comic book character always there in the picture when something big happened. She lied about landing under sniper fire in Bosnia.

But she is not just unfit for any office, she is unfit to be a candidate – a mockery.

She claimed to take full responsibility for Benghazi. What speck of responsibility did she ever take? No one can name any responsibility she took. She evaded any truth and lied.

She said she’d take that 3 am phone call. It went to voice mail and she never responded.

She said her private server arrangement at State Department was allowed. She called the investigation a “security review.” That’s like Hillary giving a national security speech now.

Hillary’s Russian reset set up the Ukraine invasion. Her reset was even a literal failure in choreography. She claimed Trump shouldn’t be trusted with the nuclear codes. Her bloody handprints are all over: from Boko Haram, to Muslim Brotherhood to Egypt to Libya, Syria, Iraq, and the arms running that ended up going to ISIS.

Hillary was chief proponent for action in Libya. Recently she said it was the president’s call. After Benghazi, she claimed to accept all responsibility for it. This is schizophrenic. She didn’t even assume any responsibility while it happened. But then she accepted full responsibility? And now she says we need to do more to help Libya. Hillary, I think you have done enough.

She said she would be forthcoming and cooperate with all the email investigation. No, she never interviewed with Inspector General. She said she would and did cooperate in the Benghazi investigation. But they never even interviewed her.

She sent personal emails at the time noting Benghazi was a terrorist attack, while doing nothing about it, and then she pushed the lie it was caused by a video. She told grieving families it was a video. Responsibility? Then she called them liars.

Hillary told Petreaus that his “testimony required the willing suspension of disbelief.” Her candidacy requires the willing suspension of disbelief. She did far worse than Petraeus ever did and he got charged. Hillary admitted her server was a mistake and then denied she did anything wrong. “It was allowed,” by who?

Hillary’s definition of responsibility is lying. She calls lying cooperating. Her definition of a record of failure is a record of accomplishment. That’s just for starters.

RightRing | Bullright

Libya terrorist outpost

Remember Obama’s Libya adventure with his heiress in waiting, Hillary? Well, it has turned into a failed state. Gee, thanks, Obama/Clinton.

Now Libya is the next operations center for the ISIS caliphate. (you know, the caliphate Obama will not admit) So leadership for ISIS has been flooding into the area.

ISIS Leader Moves to Libya

by Pete Hoekstra
IPT News
February 16, 2016

The barbaric and elusive Chechen commander who recruited British executioner “Jihadi John” has moved to Sirte, Libya to assume control of ISIS operations in the terrorist organization’s metastasizing Mediterranean caliphate.

The Investigative Project on Terrorism first learned about the movement of Abu Omar al-Shishani – among the world’s most-wanted terrorists – through its exclusive Middle East sources. Other news organizations later confirmed the account.

Western intelligence officials believe that up to 6,500 ISIS fighters – twice the number previously thought – have relocated to Libya as a result of coalition airstrikes on ISIS in the Middle East and new difficulties entering Syria.

More: http://www.investigativeproject.org/5160/isis-leader-moves-to-libya#

Yes, funny how Obama never mentions Libya, and the only time Hillary mentions it she mocks a political conspiracy of VRW that is out to get her. Conspiracy?

Hillary tough as nails?

Bill Clinton says Hill’s 11 hour hearing shows she is tough enough.

Maybe she should have screened Bill’s material better before he took it on the road?

BPR Review

“It’s amazing what they put her through,” he told a cheering crowd. “But in those 11 hours she stood with the seventh committee she proved she was tough enough to be president. I don’t think there’s another figure in America (that) could’ve done that.”

Read more: http://www.bizpacreview.com/2016/01/23/forget-13-hours-hillarys-11-hour-benghazi-testimony-makes-her-the-hero-says-bill-clinton-297924/

I don’t think there’s another figure in America that could lie like her. I guess getting 4 Americans killed, then lying about it, makes you “tough”.

The haunting lies on Benghazi

Once again, another stunning detail on Benghazi. Forces were ready to go but never sent.

Disclosed: Email Shows Pentagon Offered ‘Forces that Could Move to Benghazi’ Immediately

BY: Adam Kredo | December 8, 2015

Newly released emails show that a senior Defense Department official offered the State Department “forces that could move to Benghazi” immediately during the deadly 2012 attack there on the American consulate.

Jeremy Bash, the former Pentagon chief of staff, offered to provide forces at 7:19 p.m. on the evening of the attack, “only hours after they had begun,” according to Judicial Watch, which disclosed the email on Tuesday.

“We have identified the forces that could move to Benghazi. They are spinning up as we speak,” Bash said.

Read: http://freebeacon.com/national-security/disclosed-email-shows-pentagon-offered-forces-that-could-move-to-benghazi-immediately/

There is that word, “immediately,” which seemed to be a foreign concept on Benghazi. Why then is it so vague and hidden who stopped them? Who and why?

Unfair and Unbalanced

If Fox News’ tag line is “Fair and Balanced,” then Democrats tag line must be Unfair and Unbalanced — and proud of it. Judging by the Benghazi hearing, they lived up to that standard. Enter the Benghazi Lie.

The story of an internet video was nothing more than a straw man for Democrats. They got as much mileage out of it as they could. Seeing Jay Carney’s prostration of what he had of a reputation before the public and American press pushing a lie was such an act of self-committed denial. But it was in his words that really told the story. He said there was no proof that it was not caused by the video.

See the construction of what we now know were carefully crafted words to deceive.

“What I’m saying is that we have no evidence at this time to suggest otherwise[than the video] that there was a preplanned or ulterior instigation behind that unrest.” — Jay Carney (9/14/12)

So without proof the the Benghazi attack was caused by the video, they asserted it as the reason. See that, lack of proof was never a problem. It’s a contorted abomination of logic: they demanded proof that it was not a video. But they already knew the attack was organized terrorism. It was only the public they were shoveling that lie to. Meanwhile, Hillary wrote to Egypt that we know this is a terrorist attack — and we know it was not caused by the video. Perhaps to reassure them, no matter what they heard from us publicly, that we do “know it was a terrorist attack” not a video reaction.

But the video had nothing to do with Benghazi. Yet they started this game of ‘prove it was not the video.‘ However, what they really wanted to make very clear — in their straw man case — was that the video was not in any way, had nothing to do with, the government.

“In terms of policy, we continue to make clear that in this case, we find the video reprehensible and disgusting. We continue to try to get the message out as broadly as we can that this video is — has nothing to do, is not in any way related to the American government. It does not represent who we are or what we believe. “

It’s funny that I never heard anyone make the case that the video did have anything to do with the government. So they brought in their own accusation that it did. Again without proof that a government-tied video idea was ever postulated.

All this is minor and insignificant, Democrats would say. No, it was very significant. It was a deliberate attempt to deceive, namely the families of victims and the public. That’s why Dems claimed so many times, nothing to see here, move along.

It was only one aspect of Benghazi that was so terrible. If lying didn’t get your ire up, then everything else they did there and about it afterward would.

Q Okay. And if I could just follow up on — you earlier said the cause of the unrest was a video, then you repeated something similar later on. And I just want to be clear, that’s true of Benghazi and Cairo?

MR. CARNEY: I’m saying that that — the incident in Benghazi, as well as elsewhere, that these are all being investigated. What I’m saying is that we have no evidence at this time to suggest otherwise that there was a preplanned or ulterior instigation behind that unrest.

Now you see, Democrats liberals always demand proof when you criticize them. In fact, Hillary’s whole defense is that “there is no evidence that she did anything wrong.” That’s their mantra. Obama told us there was not a smidgen of corruption in the IRS. How many times have they said “there is no evidence of that?” They are obsessed with evidence and proof on every scandal, but they had no evidence that Benghazi was caused by a video. Yet Susan Rice took to the air on that Sunday indicting a video that had nothing to do with it, without a shred of evidence to support it. As Jordan said, that was the message and explanation they took to the American public.

The other false narrative is that it is a political witch hunt, and Republicans are trying to take her down in her bid for President. Let’s deal with that in two parts. There is the political attack defense. Well, the scandal of Benghazi was created from playing politics — presidential campaign politics.(sound familiar?) Now they assert that politics is the problem with the investigation. While making their case, they played partisan politics to the max. They were even going to boycott the committee/investigation. Benghazi was politics from the beginning. That had everything to do with Hillary’s and Obama’s Libyan adventure. Politics was the central reason for Libya and Benghazi.

Secondly, it is a witch hunt by Republicans hell bent on taking her down. First, all these actions were Hillary’s alone and no one forced her. Witch hunt? So, since she is a premier candidate for President, no one is allowed to investigate her actions? Whoops, our bad! So because Hillary is a powerful and prominent person on the left, we aren’t allowed to investigate or question her motives and actions? I didn’t know she was off limits, especially now since she is running, because it may effect her political chances. Then they claim McCarthy stated/admitted it was a political witch hunt against Hillary. No, he didn’t. He stated as a matter of fact that they began a Benghazi investigation and her polls were now down. He did not say that was the motive.

Were they not to investigate because of her political prominence and that she was running, that would be acting for political reasons. Hillary is not stupid, almost the opposite. She knows everything done in Washington has a political angle to it. In fact, she is a stereotypical player in that environment. It was all through Libya and all over Benghazi. They suddenly have a problem with the political environment? I remember the left’s prediction for years was people won’t care about Benghazi in 2016. That won’t matter to voters. But Dems have been playing political footsie with this terrorist attack since it began. Not to forget playing politics with Mo-Bros throughout the ME.

But there was a point in the hearing when I thought it was taking a turn for the worse. ( if it hadn’t already) Near the end Hillary was talking, I believe, about the co-chair of the ARB and she appeared to suddenly choke on something and started a coughing fit. That’s it, I thought, she’s going to lay it out right here on live TV. She’s going to flat line and EMT’s are going to rush in to revive her. The headline will be the Republicans tortured her with grueling questions until she collapsed. Yes, an imagined story but no more a fictional one than Hillary and Obama were trying to sell the public on Benghazi.

Afterward, the liberal media declared it a masterful marathon by Hillary Clinton. (something to that effect) Yes, Hillary was the victim but she excelled and suffered though it all. (badge of courage) Rachael Maddow asked who else ever endured such a spectacle and treatment? I guess they don’t remember Scooter Libby or the contested testimony of General Petraeus, which Hillary declared “requires the willing suspension of disbelief”.

Stunner: Hillary said she didn’t recall when she spoke to Ambassador Stevens after sending him there. Being the gruesome facts and results of Benghazi, wouldn’t you think she would have remembered the last time she spoke to Stevens? And in over 3 years since, she hasn’t been able to remember.

Hillary: I’m taking responsibility and “I was not responsible for specific security decisions.” So her definition of taking responsibility is not taking responsibility. But she ran out to lie to people it was due to a video that she still insists had something to do with it. Again, no proof of that whatsoever. And no one other than the administration said it did.

RightRing | Bullright

State of the State

I am mentioning some random observations, not that they are connected with one another.

Here we are on the verge of Hillary possibly getting into the White House, with Bubba Clinton. People are projecting her into popular office. No choice but Hillary. “Hard Choices”.

Russia revised its constitution in a way for Putin to get back into office. He’s more popular than ever in the country. They seem to love the guy.

Elists are unpopular in government or elsewhere. The American people are fed up with elitists rule in government and Washington in particular. The disgruntled seem to be across the political spectrum. Trump exposes behind the scenes media manipulation regarding the debates. Who knew? People are turned off by the bias of media in general. Media doubles down on bias.

The world is on fire with radicalism and Obama takes a sigh approach. Obama administration accuses Israel of using excessive force. State Department says that Palestine and Israel are committing terrorism.

David Cameron comes out to make speeches pointing directly to Islamic terrorism. Obama can’t be forced to use the words and says ISIS is not Islamic. Obama calls Islam a religion of peace. Obama wants to put more Muslims in space and other places. But Obama tells us the Crusades are an issue.

Jerusalem is under attack and knife wielding terrorists are spreading throughout Israael. When Israel takes defensive actions it is roundly condemned or criticized. Media cannot be any more biased against Israel.

Sure its a proxy war in Syria, but the media is finally admitting it? Old news, no? Russia has gone through its proper government channels to approve its actions. Obama is flying by the seat of his pants, much the way he did things in Libya. (that worked out well) Obama claims Russia, Putin are operating out of weakness. Hmmm.

Obama says global warming is the greatest security threat. Pay no mind to all other impostors. State of the State — maddening; requires willing suspension of disbelief.

Hillary cliff notes

In case anyone is confused, I am posting Hillary’s extensive
litany of accomplishments” and successes:

1) ________ !
2) ________ !
3) ________ !
4) ________ !
5) ________ !
…. blah blah, blah blah.

Stay tuned for updates as they are discovered. There is a rumor she turned water into wine in the Middle East somewhere but I can’t find the source or confirm it.

The story that is not told

The Canada Free Press has this article on the slaughtered “Egyptian citizens,” as Obama calls them. But there is more to the story than the graphic brutality. It needs to be told, as the author says. Even better, to be understood.

Victory over ISIS found in last words uttered by Christians

By Judi McLeod February 17, 2015

The blood of the innocents turned the sea red when ISIS slaughtered 21 Coptic Christians on a lonely Libyan beach on Feb. 15, 2015, but that should never be allowed to stand as the end of their story. …continue reading at CFP>

 

Dear Jesus, their lives are not in vain.
 
Update: Holder fields question about their terminology deficit.

Stop worrying about what we call it, or what it is. But “what we do about it” has not been any clearer than their creative terminology.

Non-Islamic terrorism spells denial

From Al Jazeera America:

The administration of Egyptian President Abdel Fattah el-Sisi must focus on economic development — not just regional security — in response to the recent beheading of 21 Egyptian Christian migrant workers in Libya, Egyptian economists and rights activists said Monday.

Tell us how adressing economic issues stops the caliphate-hungry Islamists from attacking and killing Christians and Jews? Of course they say that both need to be addressed: the terrorists and economic problems in Egypt. Well, duh, but to blame it mainly on economic plight is to miss the point. And last I checked, you need security to spawn the economic growth. Again, terrorists directly oppose that.

Here is a timeline history of ISIS atrocities.

The administration gave a watered down statement on the executions in Libya: (they call them Egyptian citizens)

Statement by the Press Secretary on the Murder of Egyptian Citizens

The United States condemns the despicable and cowardly murder of twenty-one Egyptian citizens in Libya by ISIL-affiliated terrorists. We offer our condolences to the families of the victims and our support to the Egyptian government and people as they grieve for their fellow citizens. ISIL’s barbarity knows no bounds. It is unconstrained by faith, sect, or ethnicity. This wanton killing of innocents is just the most recent of the many vicious acts perpetrated by ISIL-affiliated terrorists against the people of the region, including the murders of dozens of Egyptian soldiers in the Sinai, which only further galvanizes the international community to unite against ISIL.

This heinous act once again underscores the urgent need for a political resolution to the conflict in Libya, the continuation of which only benefits terrorist groups, including ISIL. We call on all Libyans to strongly reject this and all acts of terrorism and to unite in the face of this shared and growing threat. We continue to strongly support the efforts of the United Nations Special Representative of the Secretary-General Bernardino Leon to facilitate formation of a national unity government and help foster a political solution in Libya.

But they did not call them Christians. Couldn’t do that. To deny who they are, Coptic Christians, is to deny the motive for killing them. It’s very dishonest. Now at least they are admitting they are ISIS-affiliated terrorists. (progress for Libya I guess)

So what we have is the administration, and willing others, going out of their way not to address the direct source of the problem, radical Islamism. They won’t even call it what it is. But at the same time they can blame it on economic woes. “Yea, that’s the ticket!”

Unconstrained by faith? Let’s deny the central organizational and recruitment impetus is Islamic radicalism. But it is constrained under that central purpose, and loyal to it. In fact, it is constrained entirely under that auspice — except for opposition by military force.

By the time they get around to calling it Islamic terrorism it will be too late.(which is just great to the Islamic radicals)

And once again they call for a political solution to the problem. We just know you can sit down and discuss things rationally with irrational people hell bent on destruction. But to deny who and what Islamic terrorists are is to deny the causal source of the problem.

Not to even remind them that Obama and his enablers were a direct, willing contributor in the political problem in Libya. And they’ve have been lying about the effects ever since. Yet they’ll turn right around and blame Bush for Iraq’s turmoil. Plus all their support for Mo-Bros adding more accelerant to the fire.

The only conclusion is we have an Islamist-sympathizing administration. It’s hard to defeat an enemy by being sympathetic to it, regardless what atrocities they are committing.

What’s the definition of “In fact”?

Trey Gowdy severely excoriates Susan Rice and Carney and demands answers from Obama’s administration for Benghazi massacre cover-up.

It must mean that everything this administration decides to say is fact: your premiums will go down; if you like your plan you can keep it; if you like your doctor you can keep your doctor; it was a transparent process; there “is not a smidgen of corruption” in IRS scandal.

And they still repeat those assertions as if they are true. Now Benghazi goes to Ferguson. One of the best comments I’ve seen is: so if …”Obama made Gov.Nixon not send in the National Guard Monday night, that would make Ferguson Obama’s domestic Benghazi.’

RightRing | Bullright

Providence votes in disagreement

This takes a little explaining but I’ll try. The last few weeks reinforce my opinion that there just might be some method in all this madness. It’s a working theory.

Let me start by acknowledging all those loud voices against foreign involvements of any kind. Oh, it makes for some good soundbites. Generally, a lot of people agree with that evidenced by Ron Paul’s popularity. There are good points. There are also limits and extremes, though this is not about the validity of that theory.

Into that backdrop and sentiment came Obama into office. He attempted to project his success in that philosophy, as well as his overall ideology. Then came his second campaign and, besides all other problems, he made anti-war the central issue. “Osama bin Laden is Dead and GM is alive.” Biden said that was the bumper sticker for the campaign, despite reality. Obama’s inaction toward foreign wars was supposed to be his greatest achievement. And they eventually caught bin Laden, even if it was only a matter of time. He rode the victory lap long and hard on that right into the campaign.

Then came Benghazi. After years complaining that Bush took his eye off the ball, a terrorist attack happens. No sooner did it happen than he was figuratively and literally in full campaign mode when they began lying and standing truth on its head. They had already been spinning the Libya adventure, declaring it a validation of Obama’s approach and trying their organizing touch with their Muslim Brotherhood connections.

That was just the backdrop for what happened. As hard as team Obama tried to project his utopian vision, events took place to defy it. Well, they still argued that not only were they correct but things were going swimmingly smooth.(or they pointed to Bush) Regardless of the talk, one Mid-East uprising after another went awry under his studious leadership, if you followed their narrative about it all. They tried to reassure everyone things were working as planned. Biden had claimed Iraq would be their big success story.

But they were so busy running from and trying to rewrite Benghazi to notice what was happening — or to see the overall message. The people caught on but they didn’t. And they dug in even further, calling Benghazi a manufactured and made-up scandal just like they called Fast and Furious. It was standard protocol to deny any truth about it.

Here is the point. It was somewhere between the middle of his fist term and Benghazi. He painted a portrait that seemed nothing like reality, and the sales pitch for it became harder and harder. There never was an attempt to work with others — as Obama claimed he had always done. No, those lies aren’t the real point either. But what happened every time was as if divine providence proved him wrong.

As he was writing off Iraq as ‘his’ success story, it was falling apart. As he was betting on the Arab Spring, it got sprung by his Mo-Bros and radicals. Just like he’d declared success in Libya it fell apart. As he swore off action with a red line in Syria, with a warning not to use chemical weapons, what happened? Hello chemicals. He then declared it a success after Putin cut him off at the pass, and detoured it. Success was now an agreement, he claimed. He was applying the same negotiation strategy with Iran, and again prematurely calling it progress and success.

Now do you notice what happened every time, almost as if planned? The truth showed its head every time. So the message was always there, we could see it. I believe, and it is only my opinion, that the truth was saying “you cannot hide me, and I am not going away.” Despite what Obama did, it seemed truth would not be hidden from view. As stubbornly arrogant as Obama is, the truth appears as stubborn.

They start with deception: but the JV, regional ISIS begs to differ. No threats in this country, then people are caught at the border with ISIS ties ( plus those who got by). Napolitano said we had a border perception problem. Yea, a 20/20 problem. You can’t hide 60,000 illegals storming the border. Why make the statements? No shutdown of government, voila shutdown. Obamacare will save money, facts be damned. Clapper said we aren’t wittingly collecting Americans’ information. Obama said there was “ not even a smidgen of corruption” in the IRS scandal. Hello.

Obama rolled out his signature Obamacare putting so much emphasis on their success beforehand that it could not live up to it on any level. Even worse, the process to roll it out was so flawed it was laughable. Do you see a little humor in that? I know it wasn’t funny but it was like Providence was playing its hand again. The irony of truth, in spite of what they said and did. With all the ObamaCare hype, you’d think at least the problem-plagued program could roll out without creating even more disaster than it already was.

Even with help from mainstream media, they could not completely hide the truth. Benghazi blew up in their face, after they thought they had killed it. Then came the IRS scandal. Each time they defiantly ignored it. Then the sequester testified.

Obama portrays himself as patient and wise. Events don’t validate it. Almost the harder they try to project their narrative, someone is saying “not so fast…you can’t get away with all those lies.” You probably know what I think. But it would be hard to suggest Obama is going along completely undeterred. Oh, nothing has stopped him so far. No lightning bolts prevented his machinations. At the same time, the truth was not allowed to be buried. Lord knows they tried. Obama makes some pronouncement and within a day or two facts say the opposite. I have to see a little method to this madness. I almost look forward to the next pronouncement so truth can vote its conscience.

“Something in the depths of our souls…tells us that the world may be more than a mere combination of events.”-Louis Pasteur

RightRing | Bullright

Obama seeks doctrine of revision

…to turn back the hand of time.

So on the eve of 9/11, Obama takes to prime time to announce his supposed plan against ISIS, which he calls ISIL. He could have given this speech at any time in the last 9 months. He didn’t and made it on this particular day, after his dwindling poll numbers came out.

I won’t even give it a word for word reply because there is really nothing new. But he did say, once again, that ISIS is not an Islamic organization. Nope, it’s not..it’s not! That came early in his slithering rhetoric so it could have muted anything after.

But there is one other point that deserves mention. He said this action is designed to save and help those displaced by ISIS. Its too late, ISIS did that months ago. He watched it, or maybe he didn’t read those briefings? But now that the damage is done, he promises continued humanitarian aid. I bet they wished help would have really came to prevent what ISIS did. He did have an answer, someone said thank you, America, for coming. That was supposedly for his help earlier on Mt. Sinjar. (aid and persuade campaign)

“We cannot allow these communities to be driven from their ancient homelands,” Obama said.

How can you return to a burned home, or without the family that were slaughtered? Of course that was the whole idea of ISIS to be so brutal as to drive the people out for good. Message received. But Obama, always late to the game, now offers them cordial sympathies and promises of hope. Be careful about Obama’s promises of hope.

He spoke quite literally the way Democrats do about war strategy. The saying is that they are always fighting the last war. In this case, Obama was making a speech on a commemorative eve of the 9/11 attacks. Or that was supposed to be the backdrop. But that backdrop is of being attacked, and then there was the attack on his watch in Benghazi.

Was it an attempt to rehabilitate his image and indeed the day? Maybe. A day which two years earlier he wished to erase. A day that came at the worst time of his presidency, campaign eve of reelection. And a day which he wanted to ignore even before the Benghazi attack happened. If anything became clear, it was that Obama wanted no part in either Iraq, or the war on terrorism. What do you know, they both showed up in the same place. What are the chances?

Then he had for a year ignored the problems in Syria, after laying down a red-line which he himself ignored. He wasn’t interested in that and Putin gave him an out. His lack of attention on Iraq did not go unnoticed either. The original ISIS, an off chute of al Qaeda in Iraq was driven from Iraq in the war. It festered in Syria and gained traction during the civil war before moving right in to Iraq.

One can say it was albeit a direct creation of Obama, and his policies. Democrats resist the temptations, they say, at extended stays in countries. So be it. They claim they are not against justified actions in countries though. But we saw their prototype version in action in Libya. And it was a stunning failure. Another thing Obama immediately ignored. Our enemies didn’t. His Libyan adventure laid the groundwork for Benghazi.

Obama had already forgotten about Libya prior to the Benghazi attack. It was in the rear view mirror. And Biden told us, if we were looking for a bumper sticker, which Dems undoubtedly were, it was that “Osama bin Laden is dead and GM is alive.” (even if GM was on life support) Who cares about details? Their message sold, evidenced by how many Dems repeated it ad nausea. Whether it is true or not never mattered to them. Success in a soundbite over success on the battlefield.

Now he says he is going to counter a “warped ideology” which earlier he denied was real. He has not lacked opportunities to counter it. We had Christians slaughtered across the Mid East. They were driven almost completely out of Iraq. The black-flag Islamists marched across the ME. He may be the only one in the world willing to claim it is not Islamic. I said before he should leave the apologetics to Islamic scholars, who do not dispute the point. That they are killing Muslims, too, means exactly what? If this is his answer to evil, to revise it, then I question and reject everything about it.

RightRing | Bullright

Stupid policy tricks

More on Obama’s Libya adventure and Mid-East roadshow

Since Obama’s Libya adventure, and with the Mid-East on fire in what’s left of the Arab Spring, he has taken mostly to denying the very real results of his foreign policy foreplay. He avoids confronting the turmoil that he and his cohorts welcomed over a year ago. Results have not been fruitful, from Riyadh to Moscow, from Tripoli to Shanghai.

Post Obama’s little Libya intervention, which was supposed to be the model, we now have ISIS and the Islamic Caliphate State running wild from Damascus to Baghdad. Not to ignore all the other terrorist groups, it’s reported that there are 1200 terror groups just in Libya. Let’s forget South Africa for the moment. It was not an easy drive here.

Of course, there was Benghazi. But we‘ve moved on and terrorists have too. Then there was Obama’s version of a shell game with the vanishing red line in Syria — or was that a laser pointer in a Power Point presentation? Russia to the rescue, more on that later.

Then along comes the terrorists just when he was on a roll. Obama was forced to acknowledge ISIS, calling it JayVee in January after ignoring them for months.

‘The analogy we use around here sometimes, and I think is accurate, is if a jayvee team puts on Lakers uniforms that doesn’t make them Kobe Bryant.”

Yes, and he did think it was accurate. He thought talking smack would cut it as he dismissed them as a threat. That provides a good illustration. So just because Obama was elected doesn’t make him a good president. Just because he has AF-1 doesn’t mean he will make superior decisions. And just because he gets elected doesn’t mean he is qualified. Obama is proving it everyday. But Obama thought talking smack and dissing an enemy out of hand would suffice because that is the way he always treated his opponents or potential opponents: like they were nothing, not up to it, or beneath him. That’s his M/O.

Now the irony and embarrassment of being forced to respond to those JayVee hoodlums with F-18’s and 500-pounders from the deck of USS George H.W. Bush carrier. Oops!

Along the way, we heard what I call the doctrine of ‘walk softly and carry a big script’ had morphed into Obama’s official doctrine: “don’t do stupid shit”— “stuff” in the public version. But looking back, what has Obama done that wasn’t stupid, whether abroad or here at home?

He insulted Israel how many times? His red line was a nightly punch line. His “more flexible” approach to Russia was the foundation for all sorts of actions from Putin, and our concessions. Obama’s arms-running across the Middle East may have backfired throughout. His comments toward Israel in the middle of a war were a combination of insensitive and stupid. His meddling in Israel’s self defense all the while neglecting our own security, especially at the border. And his Executive “Dream” pen started the nightmare on the border. Yet he was counseling Israel on their aggressive approach under attack. How many degrees of stupid are there? And he shut down air travel to Tel Aviv.

He reduced sanctions on Iran as the centrifuges spin away. He watched Crimea be gobbled up by Russia, while making backhanded remarks that must have given Putin chuckles. He sent out Kerry to make stupid remarks. What good is doing stupid stuff if you don’t talk up a good game? And if all else fails, he still has his denial doctrine.

Then there was the traveling Snowden sideshow and eaves dropping on Angela Merkel. There are stupid actions and consequences for inaction, too. Obama prefers a mixture.

RightRing | Bullright

Coalition of enough

Egypt and UAE strike Islamist militias in Libya

By Anne Gearan August 25 | Washington Post

The United Arab Emirates and Egypt have carried out a series of airstrikes in the Libyan capital, Tripoli, U.S. officials said Monday, marking an escalation in the chaotic war among Libya’s rival militias that has driven American and other diplomats from the country.

The Obama administration did not know ahead of time about the highly unusual military intervention, although the United States was aware that action by Arab states might come as the crisis in Libya worsened, said one official who spoke on the condition of anonymity because of the sensitivity of the matter.

The airstrikes appear tied to fear over the growing muscle of Islamist militias. The region’s monarchies and secular dictatorships are increasingly alarmed about Islamist gains from Libya to Syria and Iraq.

More: http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/egypt-and-uae-strike-islamist-militias-in-libya/2014/08/25/8685ef04-2c98-11e4-be9e-60cc44c01e7f_story.html

 

At least someone took some taken. Could this be the reason for the turnabout tough-talk statements from the administration, via Dempsey and Hagel? Who knows but it validates the seriousness, while the Oval Occupant waxes his putter. Well, I wonder how long it will take Obama to hear about it from media?

Rhodes’ musical chairs on Iraq and ISIS

White House: Foley’s killing was ‘absolutely’ a terrorist attack. That from Ben Rhodes in his press briefing from Martha’s Vineyard with Obama on vacation.

White House: Foley’s killing was ‘absolutely’ a terrorist attack

By Justin Sink – 08/22/14 | The Hill

The killing of American journalist James Foley was “absolutely” a terrorist attack, the White House said Friday.

Deputy national security adviser Ben Rhodes, briefing reporters from Martha’s Vineyard, said Foley’s beheading by the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria (ISIS) — and the release of an online video showing the aftermath — was a direct assault on the United States.

“When you see somebody killed in such a horrific way, that represents a terrorist attack against our country and against an American citizen,” Rhodes said.

“Clearly, the brutal execution of Jim Foley represented an affront — an attack not just him, but he’s an American, and we see that as an attack on our country when one of our own is killed like that,” he added.

Rhodes addressed the media the day after Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Gen. Martin Dempsey floated expanding the scope of military action against ISIS into Syria.

“This is an organization that has an apocalyptic end-of-days strategic vision that will eventually have to be defeated,” Dempsey said. “Can they be defeated without addressing that part of the organization that resides in Syria? The answer is no.”

Rhodes said President Obama would consider airstrikes against Islamist militants operating in Syria if it were necessary to help protect Americans.

“We’re actively considering what’s going to be necessary to deal with that threat, and we’re not going to be restricted by borders,” Rhodes told reporters Friday. “We’ve shown time and again that if there’s a counterterrorism threat, we’ll take direct action against that threat if necessary.”

The White House said that the president has not yet been presented with specific military options “outside of those that are carrying out the current missions in Iraq.”

“But we would certainly look at what is necessary in the long term to make sure we’re protecting Americans,” Rhodes said.

Read more: http://thehill.com/homenews/administration/215778-white-house-foleys-killing-was-absolutely-a-terrorist-attack

Ben Rhodes could not find those words “absolutely” a “terrorist attack” on the US. Rhodes, who was behind the memos and Susan Rice’s talking points on Beghazi, now declares an attack on one American is a legitimate terrorist attack. A terrorist group claimed credit for the Benghazi attack, yet he could not voice those words. Now he can clearly call it terrorism. Will the real Ben Rohodes stand up… or sit down and shut up.

In an email to Susan Rice in prep for her infamous news tour on Benghazi, Rhodes said: “To underscore that these protests are rooted in an Internet video, and not a broader failure of policy.”

It’s a shame old fiction writer Rhodes could not find the words “Terrorist Attack” on Benghazi, after slaughtering 3 Americans and a US ambassador the way they did. That’s checkmate, Rhodes! None of that “absolutely” shit about Benghazi, was there?

RightRing | Bullright

Benghazi: administration busted again

Explosive New Report About Benghazi: They Heard the Terrorists on the Phones While it Happened…

By Caroline Schaeffer | IJReview

A damaging new report from the Air Force pilot who transported embassy officials from Libya discloses that the terrorists who attacked the Benghazi compound and murdered four Americans, including Ambassador Chris Stevens, two Navy SEALs, and one information officer, stole State Department cell phones to call their higher-ups and declare their operation a success.

Because they were using State Department phones, U.S. spy agencies overheard their conversations in real time, he says, and knew they were talking to terrorist leaders about a planned mission.

This new information, reports Fox News, will damage the State Department and White House claim that initial intelligence suggested that the attack was over an anti-Islam video, instead of a coordinated attack. Administration officials including National Security Adviser Susan Rice maintained this “anti-Islam video” claim for weeks after the attacks.

Fox News host Bret Baier interviewed retired Air Force Major Eric Stahl, who commanded and piloted the C-17 which transported the bodies of the four victims of the Benghazi attack, as well as survivors.

In the interview, Stahl says that members of the CIA were confused by the Administration’s claims, because “they knew during the attack…who was doing the attacking.” And this claim was backed up by another official.

The second source, who requested anonymity to discuss classified data, told Fox News he had personally read the intelligence reports at the time that contained references to calls by terrorists – using State Department cell phones captured at the consulate during the battle – to their terrorist leaders. The second source also confirmed that the security teams on the ground received this intelligence in real time.

Furthermore, Stahl wonders why his quick-ready team wasn’t called up sooner, if the State Department knew of the terrorist attack as it was happening.

Hillary Clinton may wonder what difference it makes whether it was a planned terrorist attack or a spontaneous riot which caused the murder of four Americans.

MORE>
 

As Hillary slithers out on the campaign trail, it’s obvious we haven’t heard the last of this. Neither has she. Once again, it counters their entire flimsy narrative. Her supporters will be screaming “but people don’t care about that”.

She didn’t like to do media appearances, so they sent Susan Rice. Now she’s on book tour doing media everywhere. She also does 200k speeches. So maybe they didn’t pay her the right price. They criticized Mitt Romney for his statements on the attack. Everyone piled on to criticize Romney at the time, when he said:

“I’m outraged by the attacks on American diplomatic missions in Libya and Egypt and by the death of an American consulate worker in Benghazi. It’s disgraceful that the Obama administration’s first response was not to condemn attacks on our diplomatic missions, but to sympathize with those who waged the attacks.”

Oh, they swung on a pivot attacking him and his “campaign” for that. But Obama and Hillary were in office and aware of what was going on. Plausible denial is just not plausible. Yet it was open season to criticize Romney at the time.

Flash forward, they are all criticizing the soldiers for telling the truth about Bergdahl. It’s always amazing when they find their voice on issues. They were not happy about pictures leaked out on the border scandal either. Before that, not a word about it. They weren’t happy about the news of VA, but before that nothing. Just as Hillary has a selective voice.

RightRing | Bullright