Gowdy admits key Republican talking point on Benghazi is meritless

[lawgator1]

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/05/18/u...an-theory.html?smid=fb-nytimes&smtyp=cur&_r=0

 

[theFallGuy]

(Washington, DC) – Judicial Watch today released a new Benghazi email from then-Department of Defense Chief of Staff Jeremy Bash to State Department leadership immediately offering “forces that could move to Benghazi” during the terrorist attack on the U.S. Special Mission Compound in Benghazi, Libya on September 11, 2012. In an email sent to top Department of State officials, at 7:19 p.m. ET, only hours after the attack had begun, Bash says, “we have identified the forces that could move to Benghazi. They are spinning up as we speak.” The Obama administration redacted the details of the military forces available, oddly citing a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) exemption that allows the withholding of “deliberative process” information.

Bash’s email seems to directly contradict testimony given by then-Secretary of Defense Leon Panetta before the Senate Armed Services Committee in February 2013. Defending the Obama administration’s lack of military response to the nearly six-hour-long attack on the U.S. Consulate in Benghazi, Panetta claimed that “time, distance, the lack of an adequate warning, events that moved very quickly on the ground prevented a more immediate response.”

 

[lawgator1]

(Washington, DC) – Judicial Watch today released a new Benghazi email from then-Department of Defense Chief of Staff Jeremy Bash to State Department leadership immediately offering “forces that could move to Benghazi” during the terrorist attack on the U.S. Special Mission Compound in Benghazi, Libya on September 11, 2012. In an email sent to top Department of State officials, at 7:19 p.m. ET, only hours after the attack had begun, Bash says, “we have identified the forces that could move to Benghazi. They are spinning up as we speak.” The Obama administration redacted the details of the military forces available, oddly citing a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) exemption that allows the withholding of “deliberative process” information.

Bash’s email seems to directly contradict testimony given by then-Secretary of Defense Leon Panetta before the Senate Armed Services Committee in February 2013. Defending the Obama administration’s lack of military response to the nearly six-hour-long attack on the U.S. Consulate in Benghazi, Panetta claimed that “time, distance, the lack of an adequate warning, events that moved very quickly on the ground prevented a more immediate response.”

Gowdy, as well as other prior Republicans who have authored reports on this, says you and your fellow skreechers and partisan conspiracy theorists are idiots.

He's right.

 

[volinbham]

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/05/18/u...an-theory.html?smid=fb-nytimes&smtyp=cur&_r=0

This has never been my beef with how this admin handled Benghazi before and after.

Criminal? No. Pisspoor management, general indifferenace and attempts to spin to preserve presidential aspirations? You bet.

 

[lawgator1]

This has never been my beef with how this admin handled Benghazi before and after.

Criminal? No. Pisspoor management, general indifferenace and attempts to spin to preserve presidential aspirations? You bet.

Its not your complaint, but there are more than a few, see e.g. fallguy, who buy into the ridiculous notion that there were forces staged who could have somehow prevented this but were for some reason told not to go.

Now, the lack of security and the apparent bureaucratic runaround when they asked for more? Absolutely a fair criticism of the administration and hopefully changes made on how those requests handled.

The "spin" angle we've been over before. I think it was a combination of mixed reports on how it evolved plus avoiding generally casting too broad a net against Muslims at a sensitive moment in dealing with issues over there, whereas you think it was masterminded to not hurt Obama. We aren't going to agree on that, ever.

 

[volinbham]

Its not your complaint, but there are more than a few, see e.g. fallguy, who buy into the ridiculous notion that there were forces staged who could have somehow prevented this but were for some reason told not to go.

Now, the lack of security and the apparent bureaucratic runaround when they asked for more? Absolutely a fair criticism of the administration and hopefully changes made on how those requests handled.

The "spin" angle we've been over before. I think it was a combination of mixed reports on how it evolved plus avoiding generally casting too broad a net against Muslims at a sensitive moment in dealing with issues over there, whereas you think it was masterminded to not hurt Obama. We aren't going to agree on that, ever.

Hmmm, interesting that Ben Rhodes (spin master extraordinaire) crafted the talking points.

 

[lawgator1]

Hmmm, interesting that Ben Rhodes (spin master extraordinaire) crafted the talking points.

I'm sorry, but I believe that the reports have indicated that there was Intelligence, mistaken, that there were protests related to the video and that this grew out of that. There were conflicting reports, too. That was cleared up in about 10 days. And I would also point out over a month before the election. Kind of hurts your theory that it was related to the election, doesn't it?

 

[SpaceCoastVol]

Screeeeeereeeeeeeeeeeech

 

[IPleadInsanity]

The overriding problem with Benghazi is, when our embassy was under attack, she sent no one. I would like to the person in charge would send everyone please, even if they have no chance of making it there in time. You don't think, you don't spin, you don't need to be smart you just send everyone. Its that simple.

 

[lawgator1]

The overriding problem with Benghazi is, when our embassy was under attack, she sent no one. I would like to the person in charge would send everyone please, even if they have no chance of making it there in time. You don't think, you don't spin, you don't need to be smart you just send everyone. Its that simple.

I could be wrong, but I don't think the Secretary of State orders military action.

 

[theFallGuy]

Gowdy, as well as other prior Republicans who have authored reports on this, says you and your fellow skreechers and partisan conspiracy theorists are idiots.

He's right.

so an email from the Department of Defense's Chief of Staff basically saying they have forces ready to move is the equivalent of being a skreecher and part of a partisan conspiracy. Ok got it.

 

[theFallGuy]

if only that email could've been stored on Hillary's private email server, then they could've erased it

 

[theFallGuy]

The overriding problem with Benghazi is, when our embassy was under attack, she sent no one. I would like to the person in charge would send everyone please, even if they have no chance of making it there in time. You don't think, you don't spin, you don't need to be smart you just send everyone. Its that simple.

you are right, absolutely nothing was done or being done about this. In fact, the DOJ just said they weren't pursuing the death penalty for one of the alleged perpetrators. I can tell that the Obama regime is real serious about this

https://www.washingtonpost.com/loca...4654f4-16dd-11e6-aa55-670cabef46e0_story.html

 

[theFallGuy]

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/05/18/u...an-theory.html?smid=fb-nytimes&smtyp=cur&_r=0

Also, bear in mind Mr. Gowdy is speaking in terms of 20/20 vision on past events. He knows exactly how long the fight lasted. So in reflection, maybe fighters could not have made it in time. However, this does not abstain the State Department and DOD from the fact that they made absolutely no attempt to help fellow Americans under attack. There is no excuse for that as much as you and the NY Times would love to spread your conspiracy theory.

 

[1972 Grad]

Gowdy, as well as other prior Republicans who have authored reports on this, says you and your fellow skreechers and partisan conspiracy theorists are idiots.

He's right.

Gowdy is a stand up guy, and his character is beyond reproach. Always has been.

 

[volinbham]

I'm sorry, but I believe that the reports have indicated that there was Intelligence, mistaken, that there were protests related to the video and that this grew out of that. There were conflicting reports, too. That was cleared up in about 10 days. And I would also point out over a month before the election. Kind of hurts your theory that it was related to the election, doesn't it?

Not at all - the predominance of the evidence went against the official narrative that was being used 10 days out. Rice claimed the only things we know for sure are 1) result of video and 2) spontaneous. The evidence (mistaken or not) does not support either of those claims and never did. Rhodes was a key crafter of the talking points along with Morrell who has admitted he added some of that to provide cover for State.

Cleared up is a generous way of stating things as well.

This was a black eye right before the election and the admin did all it possibly could to deflect the real story. Eventually, they could no longer support their story so they fell back on "fog of war" and hoped people would buy it.

 

[lawgator1]

so an email from the Department of Defense's Chief of Staff basically saying they have forces ready to move is the equivalent of being a skreecher and part of a partisan conspiracy. Ok got it.

Let's see if you can follow this. I have my doubts you can, but let's try one more time...

No. One. Could. Have. Arrived. In. Time. To. Help.


Read it slowly. Better yet, have someone read it to you. Maybe that will help.

 

[lawgator1]

Not at all - the predominance of the evidence went against the official narrative that was being used 10 days out. Rice claimed the only things we know for sure are 1) result of video and 2) spontaneous. The evidence (mistaken or not) does not support either of those claims and never did. Rhodes was a key crafter of the talking points along with Morrell who has admitted he added some of that to provide cover for State.

Cleared up is a generous way of stating things as well.

This was a black eye right before the election and the admin did all it possibly could to deflect the real story. Eventually, they could no longer support their story so they fell back on "fog of war" and hoped people would buy it.

Pretty weak post. Jmo.

 

[hog88]

Let's see if you can follow this. I have my doubts you can, but let's try one more time...

No. One. Could. Have. Arrived. In. Time. To. Help.


Read it slowly. Better yet, have someone read it to you. Maybe that will help.

No one could have known that at the time.

 

[lawgator1]

No one could have known that at the time.

Ugh. Who told that unit not to go, and why?

 

[hog88]

Ugh. Who told that unit not to go, and why?

I don't know, who?

The attack lasted what 13-18 hours or something? At hour 3, 4, 5 not a damn person knew how long it would last so using the defense of "no one could get there in time" is disingenuous.

 

[SergeantVol]

Let's see if you can follow this. I have my doubts you can, but let's try one more time...

No. One. Could. Have. Arrived. In. Time. To. Help.


Read it slowly. Better yet, have someone read it to you. Maybe that will help.

You do realize that we have forces in Italy, naval forces in the Med, forces in the Sinai, forces working with the African Union, and many other places close to Benghazi. We have an entire Airborne Brigade in Italy and SOCEUR (a whole special forces command in Europe that could deploy teams that could get there within a couple hours).

With the amount of current and veteran military members on here, you are better not debating this point. We are all very well aware of the capabilities of American military forces. The point is forces could have arrived there in time but your personal heroes; Obama and Clinton) chose not to act sacrificing those at the embassy.

Stay in your lane!

 

[SergeantVol]

Ugh. Who told that unit not to go, and why?

Orders for an operation like that could only be blessed off by the State Department and the Commander-in-Chief.

I have no idea why they told them not to go. Gross negligence? Incompetence? Take your pick.

 

[lawgator1]

You do realize that we have forces in Italy, naval forces in the Med, forces in the Sinai, forces working with the African Union, and many other places close to Benghazi. We have an entire Airborne Brigade in Italy and SOCEUR (a whole special forces command in Europe that could deploy teams that could get there within a couple hours).

With the amount of current and veteran military members on here, you are better not debating this point. We are all very well aware of the capabilities of American military forces. The point is forces could have arrived there in time but your personal heroes; Obama and Clinton) chose not to act sacrificing those at the embassy.

Stay in your lane!

Gowdy says it is well established in all of these investigations that YOU ARE WRONG.

 

[Vol8188]

"You should never question a president during a time of war"-Fox News 2001-January 2009