Search






Jeff's Amazon.com Wish List

Archive Calendar

November 2024
M T W T F S S
 123
45678910
11121314151617
18192021222324
252627282930  

Archives

“WH: ‘We Decline to Comment’ on When Obama Learned of E-Mails, Met With NSC on Benghazi”

After all, “transparency” was a marketing term, not an agreement to sign our own death certificate:

The White House is declining to say when President Barack Obama first learned of three e-mails that the State Department sent to the White House on Sept. 11, 2012, directly notifying the Executive Office of the President that the U.S. Consulate in Benghazi was under attack, that U.S. Amb. Chris Stevens was at the Benghazi mission at the time of the attack, and that the group Ansar al-Sharia had taken credit for the attack.

The White House also declined to say when the president first met with the National Security Council after the Benghazi attack.

“I have been asked by one of our spokespeople to relay ‘that we decline to comment,’” said White House National Security Staff aide Debbie Bird in a written response to CNSNews.com.

CNSNews.com had asked Bird: 1) “When did the President first meet with the National Security Council after the Benghazi attack on 9/11/12?” 2) “When did White House staff first discuss the substance of the e-mails that went to the White House with the President or with the National Security Advisor?”

Carney also took a question about the e-mails today during a press gaggle held aboard Air Force One at 9:34 a.m. A reporter asked: “Jay, there are some emails that have emerged, which suggest that the White House and other areas of the government were told within hours of the Benghazi attack that an extremist group had claimed responsibility. How is that compatible with the idea that it was a spontaneous attack?”

Carney downplayed the significance of the State Department emails.

“There were emails about all sorts of information that was becoming available in the aftermath of the attack,” Carney said. “The email you’re referring to was an open-source, unclassified email referring to an assertion made on a social media site that everyone in this room had access to and knew about instantaneously. There was a variety of information coming in.

[…]

“Again,” said Carney, “this was an open-source, unclassified email about a posting on a Facebook site. I would also note I think that within a few hours, that organization itself claimed that it had not been responsible. Neither should be taken as fact. That’s why there’s an investigation underway.”

The NSC is chaired by the president, and includes Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, Defense Secretary Leon Panetta, National Security Advisor Tom Donilon, Joint Chiefs of Staff Chairman Martin Dempsey, Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner and U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder. A NSC meeting would allow the leader of the intelligence community to communicate directly with the leader of the State Department in the presence of the president and for all of them to weigh any conflicting information.

The three emails in question, which were obtained by CBS News, were sent by the State Department to various government officials, including two officials in the Executive Office of the President, on Sept. 11, 2012, while the attack on the Benghazi was taking place and immediately after it had taken place.

Funny, they were dubious about the facts of a terror attack they themselves were able to witness in real time — and yet they were comfortable enough with the assertion that a YouTube video had caused rioting  (which they now disavow having ever witnessed, because it didn’t happen) to allow the filmmaker’s identity be known, where he lived known, and while a Pakistan official responded by putting a bounty on the head of this US filmmaker, the Administration responded by buying ads apologizing for our First Amendment.

So you’ll excuse me if I don’t take lectures about rushes to judgment from this Administration and all its various lackeys involved in the cover up of mass murder.  That’s just the way I roll.

 

 

41 Replies to ““WH: ‘We Decline to Comment’ on When Obama Learned of E-Mails, Met With NSC on Benghazi””

  1. DarthLevin says:

    There were fighters and AC130 gunships an hour away in Italy. They knew our people were in trouble and fighting terrorists.

    They. Did. Nothing.

    They deliberately, willingly, and dispassionately turned their backs on people calling for help, hoping for help, and receiving exactly nothing.

    Nothing except the honor of being a prop in a flag-draped coffin at a stump speech.

    But Obama is a good man.

    *spit*

  2. Ernst Schreiber says:

    They did worse than nothing. They blamed America for the murder of America’s representatives.

  3. Ernst Schreiber says:

    About the only thing they haven’t done yet is to lament the fact that the wrong American’s paid the price for America’s sins a la Michael Moore.

    But there’s eleven days to go, so, who knows?

  4. McGehee says:

    They did worse than nothing. They blamed America for the murder of America’s representatives.

    This. With extreme prejudice.

    The fuckers.

  5. sdferr says:

    Just listened to Ed Driscoll’s interview of Evan Sayet. It’s not a funny coincidence that the subject of blaming America (of necessity from the leftist’s view as Sayet sees it) lands front and center there.

  6. Ernst Schreiber says:

    New meme:

    Barak Obama 2012: this time it really is America’s fault!

  7. leigh says:

    If the fucker had a conscience, he’d be haunted by his dereliction of duty.

    In the meantime, I hope the ghosts of Chris Stevens and the others plague his dreams until he dies.

  8. Silver Whistle says:

    If the fucker had a conscience, he’d be haunted by his dereliction of duty.

    I think you’ll find his idea of his duty differs substantially from yours, leigh.

  9. leigh says:

    Indeed, SW. More is the pity.

    How does that saying go? “The saddest of these is what might have been. . . “

  10. […] all its various lackeys involved in the cover up of mass murder. That’s just the way I roll. https://proteinwisdom.com/?p=44707 [b]comments The White House also declined to say when the president first met with the […]

  11. Pablo says:

    Wow. The father of slain ex-SEAL Tyrone Woods says Hillary told him at the repatriation ceremony that they were going to have Nakoula arrested and prosecuted. Because it was all about the video, natch. He just up and called in to Lars Larson’s show.

  12. sdferr says:

    Hokey smoke Bullwinkle. Where did he come down on that prosecution?

  13. Pablo says:

    He’s not a fan of the administration.

  14. leigh says:

    Mr. Woods claimed insincerity on the part of the president (who btw has a ‘dead fish’ handshake) and SoS.

  15. sdferr says:

    His question toward the end was: “Who said ‘Don’t go rescue them’? We need to find out who said don’t go rescue them.” Who determined the negative “don’t”, who was content with the passive “let” [them suffer their fate]. Any such answer will be very long in coming, if it ever comes to light.

  16. Drumwaster says:

    One of my jobs in the Navy was hooked into NORAD in case one of the P-3s saw a SLBM launched from close in near the US coast, but I remember that there were urgency indicators that Group and Theater commanders could add to a message (Navy Blue, Pinnacle, etc.) that would ensure that it would be in the hands of National Command Authority (POTUS or VPOTUS) within a VERY short timeframe (better than Domino’s Pizza).

    I cannot imagine that a full Ambassador would have less authority to use that classification than a mere 1-star, and “people are shooting at us” is a pretty hot topic, so for him to say that he didn’t get it is bullshit of the highest order.

  17. Pablo says:

    Who determined the negative “don’t”, who was content with the passive “let” [them suffer their fate]. Any such answer will be very long in coming, if it ever comes to light.

    I suspect we’ll get those sorts of answers either soon after 11/6 or soon after 1/20, assuming things remain on their current track. Once his power is gone, so will be the silence of his various and sundry minions who will prefer their own reputations, such as they are, to his.

  18. Pablo says:

    Drumwaster, if he didn’t get it, it’s because he wasn’t doing his job.

  19. Ernst Schreiber says:

    His job is to get reelected Pablo.

    He’s the hardest working man in America.

  20. sdferr says:

    Here’s a posting of that Fox aftertheshowshow from last night.

    Rush just spoke of watching the media’s non-performance of their jobs as akin to seeing Woodward and Bernstein covering for Nixon. Not far wrong. Anyhow, at this point the sorts of answers implicated in a full examination of the events and the post-events-events will indict an awfully broad swath of people who simply don’t want to know what has happened and what is happening. It’s gonna be a tough nut to crack I think, given all the base interests implicated in keeping quiet about it. (Not that they’ll succeed, mind, just that they’ll fight like hell to keep their jobs and “market shares”.)

  21. sdferr says:

    Just heard a Leon Panetta s.o.t. on the radio, Leon saying (paraphrasing): “You don’t send forces into harms way without knowing what is going on in real-time.” So this could be Leon’s response to Charles Woods’ question, I dunno. Pretty quick on the draw if so.

  22. Ernst Schreiber says:

    You don’t if your more worried about the political downside of an operation going sideways than you are about rescuing your ambassador while there’s still time.

  23. sdferr says:

    Haven’t laid hands on a written story of Panetta’s remarks yet. This doesn’t mention them, despite that Panetta seemed to be speaking precisely to what the article says the Pentagon is silent about. Nothing at Drudge that I can see, nothing at The Hill, nothing at Breitbart Big Peace, nothing at the Tatler, nothing at Fox, nothing at the Blaze, nothing at Free Beacon, nothing at WeeklyStand., nothing at BingNews — I ain’t findin’ it.

  24. sdferr says:

    Here we go: C-Span: Pentagon News briefing, with Panetta and Dempsey.

  25. leigh says:

    Is it unusual for the former CIA director to slide over to Defense the way Panetta has?

    I’m asking since I cannot remember it happening in the past.

  26. McGehee says:

    Rush just spoke of watching the media’s non-performance of their jobs as akin to seeing Woodward and Bernstein covering for Nixon. Not far wrong.

    The difficulty of getting leftists elected to the White House has been ticking upward with every election cycle. They got Carter in because of Watergate and the Nixon pardon. They got Clinton in because he campaigned as a centrist despite having a full-on socialist wife to whom he would delegate health care “reform.” They got Obama in because of a perfect storm of factors, plus his race.

    This has been going on a long time, and the leftists in media have become so frustrated with an American electorate that doesn’t agree with them that desperation has crept in and taken over their lives.

    I think the journalistic community may be about to move out of the bargaining stage and into depression. If there is a God, that will happen by the end of this year, and things should finally begin to improve.

  27. McGehee says:

    I’m asking since I cannot remember it happening in the past.

    Neither can I. I don’t think it ever has. Wikipedia should have lists of past CIA directors and past SECDEFs to compare.

  28. sdferr says:

    CBS Pentagon correspondent David Martin: “The attack occurred on the anniversary of 9/11, whether or not the anniversary had anything to do with the attack: did you have forces on any heightened alert in that area, because of the approaching anniversary?”

    SoD Panetta: “We did.”

    JCoSChief Dempsey: “And let me point out that it was 9/11 everywhere in the world.”

    sdferr, miming that lot: “What, you should want we do our jobs, like planning for stuff like this? Man, you’re a tough crowd.”

  29. leigh says:

    What kind of a bullshit response is that, Dempsey? Were you on the job or not?

  30. sdferr says:

    Gates was a CIA careerist, and held the Directorship for a time.

  31. leigh says:

    Thanks, sdferr. The list at Wiki is incomplete and ends with George Tenet, so no help there.

  32. sdferr says:

    It ends with Porter Goss. My ol’ House Rep.

  33. leigh says:

    My mistake. I am conflating the two lists, perhaps. Defense does show Panetta.

  34. geoffb says:

    Pretty quick on the draw if so.

    Would that his response to the attack had been so.

    Panetta is halfway competent for a Democrat but you don’t get into high office, any more, in that Party unless you are Party & Power uber alles. So when push comes to shove they always look for what seems to benefit the Party at the moment. And screw country and the little guys at the sharp end.

  35. sdferr says:

    After a little perusal geoffb, I think it probably had nothing to do directly with Mr. Woods own question (even just on the timeline), but rather with the question itself having got loose in the population at large and thence conveyed into the DoD pressroom by a lackey.

  36. palaeomerus says:

    Are there any adults left or does the whole country run by middle school bullshit rules now? A dog can only eat so much goddamned homework even theoretically. Somebody somewhere can step and actually do their job right?

  37. palaeomerus says:

    Are we really virtually handing out free ambassadors for a little rape and torch now? If so WHY? Is this country stupid, crazy, or is it ..I dunno…possessed?

  38. geoffb says:

    Probably true sdferr, but what I’m about is that the DoD has plans on the shelf for just about any contingency that anyone can imagine. Kept up to date as conditions change in the world.

    I’m sure there were, within a half hour at most, several responses laid out for a decision and even before that requests to get various forces in motion so as to be on station when the decision was made.

    Not only that but our forces train to improvise solutions on the fly to rapidly changing situations. All they needed was a go signal from the CIC to rescue the men in danger and take control of the situation on the ground.

    Obama has shown now at least three times that he likes to dither while things burn. The pirates, Osama, and now the Consulate. If he was a mere general officer he would have been relieved of command after the first one. He must be this Nov.

    The Democrats have for too long put Party loyalty as “number one with a bullet” in what they use to select who gets support from above. Now they selected a Chicago bag man as a worthy candidate and we fell for it once. That one is shame on them and us. Doing it again after all we and they now know is damn them and damn us too.

  39. sdferr says:

    Rusty over at Jawa says D. Riehl’s in hospital (and notes it’s serious) — Riehl’s own site says nuttin. Ya’ll hear tell of a cause?

  40. palaeomerus says:

    More of Riehl over at INSTY:

    ” DAN RIEHL IS SICK: Dr. Melissa Clouthier writes:
    Sorry I didn’t write earlier. Thought you’d want to know that Dan went into the hospital last night with respiratory failure. They had to do pulmonary bypass because he couldn’t be intubated. The doctor gave him a 50-50 chance of living.

    I talked to the nurse today, she thinks he’s doing better. They’re currently chasing his heart rate and trying to keep him oxygenated — he has a nasal canula now, which is not that big of a deal. They said they’d try to move him out of ICU tonight but weren’t sure.

    He’s at the Fairfax County hospital.

    Elizabeth Scalia suggested that I ask you to post a link to his website and maybe his tip jar. Not even sure if he has one.”

  41. sdferr says:

    Thanks for the info paleomerus, though it’s worse news than I’d hoped it would be. Despite that, Fairfax is a top of the line hospital, so mitigating somewhat from that angle.

Comments are closed.