October 27, 2012

Ruh-roh: was General Ham ordered to #StandDown & relieved of his command when he tried to deploy forces to Benghazi? [Darleen Click]

Rumor? could be but it sounds plausible enough …

I heard a story today from someone inside the military that I trust entirely. The story was in reference to General Ham that Panetta referenced in the quote below.

“(The) basic principle is that you don’t deploy forces into harm’s way without knowing what’s going on; without having some real-time information about what’s taking place,” Panetta told Pentagon reporters. “And as a result of not having that kind of information, the commander who was on the ground in that area, Gen. Ham, Gen. Dempsey and I felt very strongly that we could not put forces at risk in that situation.”

The information I heard today was that General Ham as head of Africom received the same e-mails the White House received requesting help/support as the attack was taking place. General Ham immediately had a rapid response unit ready and communicated to the Pentagon that he had a unit ready.

General Ham then received the order to stand down. His response was to screw it, he was going to help anyhow. Within 30 seconds to a minute after making the move to respond, his second in command apprehended General Ham and told him that he was now relieved of his command.

The story continues that now General Rodiguez would take General Ham’s place as the head of Africon.

I found this story when I got home after hearing this story.

President Barack Obama will nominate Army Gen. David Rodriguez to succeed Gen. Carter Ham as commander of U.S. Africa Command and Marine Lt. Gen. John Paxton to succeed Gen. Joseph Dunford as assistant commandant of the Marine Corps, Defense Secretary Leon Panetta announced Thursday.

General Rodigues Nominated as Head of Africon

As I was typing this I heard John Bolton on Greta say that there are conflicting reports of General Ham’s comments on this tragedy and why a rapid response unit was not deployed. Bolton says someone needs to find out what Ham was saying on 9/11/12.

Interesting to say the least.

h/t Instapundit

Posted by Darleen @ 11:38am

Tags: , , ,

Comments (96)

  1. He’s “a proven leader” who oversaw coalition and Afghan forces during the surge in Afghanistan, and “was the key architect of the successful campaign plan that we are now implementing,” Panetta said.

    It doesn’t appear that’s quite the testimonial Panetta seems to believe it to be. I mean he can’t be serious, can he? “Yay! Look at the way that man spun us into full-flighted retreat! What a hero!”

  2. Anyone want to bet Gen. Rodiguez is “politically acceptable” whereas Gen. Ham is not?

  3. This story about defying orders could have been fabricated in light of the report that Rodriguez would be succeeding Ham. I’m not saying that it was (I wouldn’t want to spread conspiracy theories) but it’s possible.

    It does seem important that Rodriguez will replace Ham. Why would the military go forward with that announcement now, just before the election, with Libya constantly in the news?

    It makes me think that Ham is the designated fall guy.

  4. Ham is the designated fall guy.

    If that’s the case, I hope he sings like a canary.

  5. Daryl

    I note that in the S&S article that while Panetta “praises Ham” there is not one word of what Ham is going to do after Rodriguez takes over. Retiring? Reassigned? What?

    There’s an odor wafting here that needs investigating.

  6. Also reported today, “The Navy said Saturday it is replacing the admiral in command of an aircraft carrier strike group in the Middle East, pending the outcome of an internal investigation into undisclosed allegations of inappropriate judgment.”

  7. – The water in the cess pool drain always seems to swirl in a clockwise-Panetta direction.

  8. In the main it would be imprudent NOT to view every single appointment Obama has made with great skepticism. Given the volume, it may even be simplest to make the overbroad generalization and remove them all where removal is an available option, regardless of their position or particular qualifications.

  9. According to this article, the embassy attack and deaths are probably due to the efforts of the Administration to destabilize Syria. Think Iran backed by Russia.


    The picture painted is ugly, to say the least. It also makes the argument that Panetta was actually speaking the truth. Short version: The attack on the embassy in Libya was a coordinated attack designed to draw in US forces which would then be assaulted by units that were pre-staged by the Iranians.

    The administration suspected the embassy attack was a trap (or knew) and let people die rather than risking another Mogadishu this close to the election.

  10. The story I linked makes sense in the context of General Ham being relieved.

  11. Short version: The attack on the embassy in Libya was a coordinated attack designed to draw in US forces which would then be assaulted by units that were pre-staged by the Iranians.

    And why wouldn’t somebody say so, up front, if that was what they suspected (or knew)? If you’re forfeiting the life of a fucking U.S. ambassador, you damn well better have a straight fucking story about why.

    My gut reaction to the CFP story is, track the source. Bet it’s more associated with the Maladministration’s political community than intelligence.

  12. So Obama’s story is going to be that stupid, cowardly, bad-judgment-having military officers failed to support our people in Benghazi.

    Even assuming that’s true, this gets Obama off the hook, how? He went off to Vegas instead of providing even minimal oversight.

    I know it’s a cliche to have a person in authority stomp their feet and say “DO SOMETHING!” But if the military really was sitting with its hands folded, Obama could have pushed them to act.

    The best case scenario for Obama is that career military officers screwed this up, and Obama did not correct them. That’s extremely unlikely. For one thing, State and CIA should have been pressing the military to act, because their people were in the line of fire.

    Also, if this was true, I’m sure we’d see by now leaked documents showing the military telling the administration that it was unable to intervene, or that intervention was a bad idea. We’d have Obama getting huffy on TV cameras questioning the patriotism of anyone who questioned the career military officer’s decisions. But what do we get from Obama? Dead silence. The leaks aren’t coming from him.

    No, the truth must be even worse for Obama. Why else would he cover it up? He’s trying to protect Hillary? Protect career military officers? Bullshit. He’s been a selfish prick for the last 4+ years. Why would that change now, just before the election?

  13. If the administration suspected at the time the embassy was a big trap, why would it spend weeks claiming that the attack was spontaneous?

    Even after it became clear that terrorists were involved, the administration continued to claim that the attack might have been a spontaneous attack by terrorists.

    It was a spontaneous attack by terrorists with mortars who were spontaneously setting a trap for Americans, like they were trained to do months in advance?

    And why would that prevent us from sending in air support? At the very least, air support could have killed some of the terrorists who were part of the trap.

    Why would that prevent us from sending in a reaction force 1-2 miles away, and have them hunt the terrorists?

    I don’t doubt that this might have been a trap set by Iran or some other foreign power. But even if that’s true, and whether or not the administration suspected it at the time, it doesn’t explain/justify the administration’s reaction.

  14. From Libby’s link, that rear admiral was on the USS John C Stennis which entered the 5th fleet’s AOR (Persian Gulf) on Oct 17th. It left port, Bremerton, WA, August 27th. Also, I am given to understand that the 6th Fleet is deployed (among other places) in the Med. Now, I don’ t know where the Stennis was on Sept. 11th, but I’m guessing that it was too far away to do anything about what happened in Benghazi.

    That said, I would still want to hear from General Ham. From what was reported yesterday, it would appear that the order to stand down could only come from either him or the President.

  15. So Obama’s story is going to be that stupid, cowardly, bad-judgment-having military officers failed to support our people in Benghazi.

    Actually, the inference from the stories linked is that the military wanted to do something and the administration told them not to. And when the military commanders tried to do something anyways (or didn’t stand down fast enough), they were relieved.

  16. – The decision and subsequent order would formally come from Obama, but the advise to do so would come from Panetta. and or others in his staff.

  17. I don’t know what to make of that CFP column, other than the author reminds me (perhaps wrongly) of a guy who was contributing to the American Spectator blog back in the mid oughts. For months at a time, his sources in the intelligence community were telling him that we were only days or weeks away from war with Iran .

  18. Assertionist: “There were communications intercepts!”

    Curious Observer: “Can we see them? Have you seen them?”

    Assertionist: “Oh hells no! They’re secret. See?”

    Curious Observer: “No, actually, we don’t see anything.”

  19. The denial denial.

  20. Also sounds like a rationalization to not act that people looking for a reason to not take action would leap at, doesn’t it.

    I mean, you can’t go around bitchin’ about “quagmires” and stuff for ten years and not have it influence your thinking, can you?

  21. Kristol’s ten questions for the White House:

    1.) To whom did the president give the first of his “three very clear directives”—that is, “make sure that we are securing our personnel and doing whatever we need to?”

    2.) How did he transmit this directive to the military and other agencies?

    3.) During the time when Americans were under attack, did the president convene a formal or informal meeting of his national security council? Did the president go to the situation room?

    4.) During this time, with which members of the national security team did the president speak directly?

    5.) Did Obama speak by phone or teleconference with the combatant commanders who would have sent assistance to the men under attack?

    6.) Did he speak with CIA director David Petraeus?

    7.) Was the president made aware of the repeated requests for assistance from the men under attack? When and by whom?

    8.) Did he issue any directives in response to these requests?

    9.) Did the president refuse to authorize an armed drone strike on the attackers?

    10.) Did the president refuse to authorize a C-130 to enter Libyan airspace during the attack?

    THE WEEKLY STANDARD has asked the White House these questions, and awaits a response.

  22. Ace has a link to a new story relating to this subject: http://minx.cc/?post=334306

    The White House has now denied that Obama or anyone else in the White House denied permission to carry out any mission in Benghazi.

    It’s not an airtight denial. It leaves room for the White House to tell the military not to intervene, without flat-out denying them permission. It could have been a polite suggestion that the military should choose not to intervene.

    But it appears Obama is going to blame career military officers without letting them tell their side of the story. We’re not going to see any of the orders/communications until after Obama leaves office.

  23. Just another buncha buckpassers, Obama & Co.: “Who, us? NO. Look over there.”

    Yeah, you.

  24. They’re working on a way to put the blame on Bush. I just know it. And they’ll keep at it like the Asian-American sittin’ on a fence, trying to make a dollar out of sixty-five cents in the old raaaaacist jump-rope rhyme.

  25. But it appears Obama is going to blame career military officers without letting them tell their side of the story. We’re not going to see any of the orders/communications until after Obama leaves office.

    That’s your modern Democrat party for you. Blaming the military since 1968.

    Since 1969, we’ve gone from contemptible (Carter) to dispicable (Clinton) to loathsome (Obama).

  26. McGehee, how does the administration prevent the story about running guns into Syria from coming out?

    And, how does the administration square the idea of an Iranian trap with the so-called “Arab Spring? How does the administration continue to justify the ouster of Gaddafi?

    Everything about the current administration is about the re-election of Barack Obama. Lying about Benghazi, as far as the administration is concerned, is better than the truth. Obviously, with the connivance of MBM, the WH is trying to “run out the clock” on the Libya fiasco.

    Is CFP writer correct? I don’t know, but I also see where the writer has a plausible explanation that creates context on why General Ham was relieved.

    Anyway, McGehee, the whole affair is getting worse and worse and whatever the explanation, the current administration has lied, repeatedly, all in an effort to avoid any consequences before the election.

    What we’re arguing now is the scope of the lying.

  27. What we’re arguing now is the scope of the lying.

    True. And most of us here knew from Day 1 of this administration it’s where we would end up.

  28. I’m waiting for General Tommy Franks to step up to the microphone.

    There are all kinds of pissed off retired military brass on teevee this weekend. You can practically see the steam coming out of their ears.

  29. Captain America, or as he’s known by day, President Gutsy Call.

  30. We already know the scope of the lying.

    It’s worse than Watergate.

  31. This is really pathetic. I strolled over to memeorandum and half their front page is full of stories about how raaaaaacist we all are. Including one from Colin Powell’s former CoS.

  32. There can be little doubt that any orders to stand down came directly from deep in the Perfideon. That there would be any self-serving consideration in taking the decision at all is what’s most disgusting…

  33. One thing I really hate about having a Democrat as President is that they lie so much to keep their power, and are fully capable of doing so many despicable actions to protect their both their power and their lies, and then more lies to protect their actions it is a political hall of smoke and mirrors where reality is bent and twisted. Maybe this will break one mirror, for now, perhaps.

  34. Lt. Gen. Tom McInerney asked “are we brain-dead?” and says that we should have had ISR (intelligence, surveillance, reconnaissance) assets over Libya before the 9/11 attacks ever happened, especially given the fact that radical Islamists were told by Al-Qaeda chief Zawahiri to take out Americans in retribution for our killing of Abu Yahya al-Libi over the summer.

  35. All the more reason to do our best to keep them out of power. I’m hoping that the party collapses under the weight of its own lies. Truly, their time is past and they’re nothing but an organized grievance committee.

  36. VDH:

    What the Obama administration could not concede was the truth: The lead-from-behind intervention in Libya had proved a blueprint for nothing. Libya has descended into chaos. Radical Islam had either subverted or hijacked the Arab Spring. Al Qaeda was not dismantled by the death of bin Laden or by the stepped-up drone assassination missions in Pakistan. Egypt was becoming Islamist; Syria was a bloody mess. Iran was on the way to becoming nuclear. Obama had won America no more good will in the Middle East than had prior presidents

    In other words, the administration’s entire experience in Libya — and in most of the Middle East in general — has been a bright and shining lie.

  37. Not only do they not love us, they don’t even fear us (not even a tiny little bit) anymore.

    But Israel’s afraid.

  38. Gen Ham doesn’t seem to have been relieved of his command, and Gen Rodriguez is a long way from taking over, what with Senate confirmation and all. The Army is under the impression that he’s still commanding AFRICOM.

  39. Our enemies don’t fear us and our friends can’t trust us.

  40. Pablo, you would be correct. On the Africom website the is a picture of him greeting dignitaries on September 24th.

  41. Greetings:

    Has SoD Panetta forgotten the old cavalry adage to “ride to the sound of the cannons” ???

  42. – Progtards can’t hear cannons, just like they can’t see WMD’s. The only thing they adore is white flags.

  43. SoD Panetta is closer to recalling the ersatz Lebanese adage: “You call that a hummus!? This is a hummus!”

  44. Has SoD Panetta forgotten the old cavalry adage to “ride to the sound of the cannons” ???

    You don’t deploy your cavalry without some real time information about how many cannon there are, whether or not they have infantry support, without knowing about hidden batteries and the like.

    Why, it could have been Charge of the Light Brigade! What would getting a whole brigade of cavalry shot to hell an’ gone have done to the President’s reelect numbers?

  45. The fact that, had they shown some audacity, it might have been Cavalry rides to the rescue of beleagered homsteaders in the nick of time instead, is I think telling as to the Administration’s mindset these days.

  46. had they shown some audacity

    voting “present” is the audacity of hope for president choom

  47. They can’t have it both ways.

  48. des moines register

    Today we publish our endorsement for president.

    Our support for Republican Mitt Romney may surprise, it may anger, it may please. The goal of endorsement editorials is to advance the conversation, and we invite readers to send us their views


  49. White House Says It Did Not Deny Requests for Help in Benghazi – But Did Not Issue Orders to Save US Security Officials Either

    This seems an important quality for a Dem Commander in Chief. Be ambiguous. Also known as “plausible denyability”.

    Unfortunately for them, reality is hard to conceal.

  50. Gen Ham was under investigation for financial impropriety which may have lead to his retirement. He was no way in the State Department or CIA chains of Command. The CIA station chief in Benghazi called for help through his Chain of Command. So did Amb Stevens through his State Department Chain of Command. So Gen Ham wasn’t directly involved. Obama is trying to find a fall guy. Hillary fell on her sword, Gen Patreaus said he wasn’t involved. So guess who is dispiritedly trying to find a fall guy. If the shoe fits. wear it.

    I have further insight into the whole Benghazi snafu.

  51. I have further insight into the whole Benghazi snafu.

    Quit teasing…

  52. Gen Ham was not under investigation. It was his predecessor Gen Kip Ward. http://www.stripes.com/news/ward-unlikely-to-face-court-martial-for-africom-misdeeds-1.187114

  53. So much for that secret ‘insight’, eh charles?

  54. leigh, I read some mil blogs and that is old news. I realize lots of people want the story to be true but, facts are facts.

  55. Obama needs to look all sad-faced and disgruntled. This Ungood Man has proven himself a disaster. Four more years? we’re finished, if that’s the case.

  56. The only way we will probably ever get the whole truth is for someone who is in the know to grow a pair and sacrifice their career and do the right thing. To me the Dems and Repubs are two sides of the same coin. I haven’t seen anyone yet that is willing to take on the regime. Power breeds contempt.

  57. charles w says October 27, 2012 at 8:06 pm

    Agreed with all you say here. My husband is a retired career officerand he says the same thing.

  58. The only way we will probably ever get the whole truth is for someone who is in the know to grow a pair and sacrifice their career and do the right thing.

    The full story of what happened in Libya, down to the last detail, may never be known. But, as someone once said, you don’t need to eat a whole egg to know that it is rotten. And you don’t need to know every detail of the events before, during and after the attacks to know that the story put out by the Obama administration was a fraud.
    Thomas Sowell

  59. leigh, I was only a lowly Corporal, but I knew shit when I saw it and tried not to step in it.

  60. LBascom, not saying that at all. If Obama skates on this, we will know we are led by pussy’s. I don’t need all the facts but someone needs to be punished. It needs to be the right guy and not a fall guy.

  61. Pat Cadell was livid tonight on Judge Jeanine’s show. I’ve never seen him that mad.

  62. White House Says It Did Not Deny Requests for Help in Benghazi – But Did Not Issue Orders to Save US Security Officials Either

    That fits the Obama pattern perfectly. Remember, we’re talking about the guy who dithered for three months before giving the go-ahead for the surge in Afghanistan that the generals on the ground requested. I’d be willing to bet that when they requested permission to launch a rescue Obama told them he’d get back to them after he’d given it due consideration.

    So give the guy a break! It’s only been six weeks, he’s still thinking about it.

  63. R.
    So let’s see if I got this right Mr. President. You knew someone was in trouble, bad trouble, but you did nothing to help them?

    Now let me be perfectly clear. Actions such as “helping” can have colossal costs. If you don’t have all the information to know just what those costs may be you might end up destroying more than you are attempting to save. Even if that bar is met there are the political costs which might go with even a “success” not to mention their surely high price if the action is less than a perfect and total success.

    That said, I would never have stopped anyone else from helping out if they truly wanted to risk their all to do so. I’m not a monster you know. Just practical and pragmatic.

    Is there somewhere you learned this? Or did you come to this way of handling situations yourself?

    As much as I’d like to take credit for this method I can’t. I learned it from one of the true greats of our Party, Teddy.

  64. All these supposed leaders in DC are afraid that if they really take on Obama they will be accused of being racist. Boehner the third in line has not done shit. He should start to do his job. He is not really white he was orange the last time I saw him. So by lefty logic he cannot be racist.

  65. If that’s true, that works out to about 1 magazine each.

    Two if they’re double-tapping.

  66. It began around nightfall on Sept. 11 with around 150 bearded gunmen, some wearing the Afghan-style tunics favored by Islamic militants, sealing off the streets leading to the U.S. Consulate in Benghazi. They set up roadblocks with pick-up trucks mounted with heavy machine guns, according to witnesses.

    The trucks bore the logo of Ansar al-Shariah, a powerful local group of Islamist militants who worked with the municipal government to manage security in Benghazi, the main city in eastern Libya and birthplace of the uprising last year that ousted Moammar Gadhafi after a 42-year dictatorship.

    There was no sign of a spontaneous protest against an American-made movie denigrating Islam’s Prophet Muhammad. But a lawyer passing by the scene said he saw the militants gathering around 20 youths from nearby to chant against the film. Within an hour or so, the assault began, guns blazing as the militants blasted into the compound.

  67. Much as I love that story, it’s inconsistent with the report of Woods and Doherty being killed by a mortar at the annex after recovering Smith.

  68. I’m finding a little (very little) satisfaction in the fact that Obama has knocked over his house of cards by playing God.

  69. well they did sumthing during a 7 hour gun battle other than voting present

  70. an act of god


  71. America was pissed enough to lie about George Zimmerman and Trevon Martin so much that they should a picture of the “victim” at 11 and lied about the wounds on Zimmerman, Zimmerman’s ethic compisition, the nature of the neighborhood, the contents of the phone call, and went so far as to say that Zimmerman coldly hunted Martin like and animal and executed him and the police let him go.

    Meanwhile no one much (who matters!) cares about Benghazi and it’s just some unfair trumped up political shit or something. Nice try repubs! It was probably bush’s fault anyway. Whatever it was. Binders full of Romensia! Snort!

  72. [T]hey did sumthin[‘] … other than [vote] present

    Fuckin’ A, Bubba.

  73. This is a sick country now. I hope God has ordered some extra mercy for the times to come. We’ll need all of it.

  74. There have been reports the last couple of days saying that Doherty arrived at the annex from Tripoli after the group containing Woods had gone to the Consulate and returned to the annex, whereupon they joined up. These reports would conflict with the ScottonCapeCod story having Woods and Doherty both awakened at the annex.

    Tales arise to fill the information vacuum I guess. Could be that’s intended to be part of the effects of withholding the truth, huh? (hey, where the hell is witheld anyhow?)

  75. The aforementioned Pat Caddell interview with J. Pirro — speaking on the media Benghazi Blackout and the lying Obama administration.


  76. When Rome burned Obama fiddled.

  77. Much as I love that story, it’s inconsistent with the report of Woods and Doherty being killed by a mortar at the annex after recovering Smith.

    Right. It doesn’t seem to be sourced either.

  78. The trouble with that story is that it is designed to take in the emotionally gullible and has so many easily refutable facts that it will be used as the example of how conservatives are simply making stuff up about and lying about our heroic President. And that will then move those same gullible moderates to once more support the embattled Barack.

    Facts that are known are damning enough to the administration. And I suspect that those two [ex] SEALs did send quite a few of their attackers to hell. But this needs to be written of in a story line that does not mess up things that are known as being as close to truth as we have gotten in this so far.

  79. “making stuff up about” the attack.

  80. “As a result of not having that kind of information, the commander who was on the ground in that area, General Ham, General Dempsey and I felt very strongly that we could not put forces at risk in that situation,” Panetta said.

    You had already put forces at risk, douchebag. The question is why didn’t you help them.

  81. Lest we forget, this was a statement released by our Sec. of State at a time when the attack on the annex was still ongoing and the smoldering consulate compound was being looted.

    I condemn in the strongest terms the attack on our mission in Benghazi today. As we work to secure our personnel and facilities, we have confirmed that one of our State Department officers was killed. We are heartbroken by this terrible loss. Our thoughts and prayers are with his family and those who have suffered in this attack. This evening, I called Libyan President Magariaf to coordinate additional support to protect Americans in Libya. President Magariaf expressed his condemnation and condolences and pledged his government’s full cooperation. Some have sought to justify this vicious behavior as a response to inflammatory material posted on the Internet. The United States deplores any intentional effort to denigrate the religious beliefs of others. Our commitment to religious tolerance goes back to the very beginning of our nation. But let me be clear: There is never any justification for violent acts of this kind. In light of the events of today, the United States government is working with partner countries around the world to protect our personnel, our missions, and American citizens worldwide.

    As too with “Blackhawk Down” during her husband’s administration, the safety of American personnel stationed abroad is put in the hands of other countries security forces to their detriment. Democrats, the Party of Globalist trash.

  82. Jason Chaffetz says he traveled with Gen Ham while in Libya. He asked if assets were available and if they were in proximity at the time. Yes to both.

  83. I don’t know how you guys see the coverup and blackout-of-the-coverup story but it appears to me that with Sandy poised to come ashore the major Obama media outlets have semi-offically o’erlept the period during which they could have readily reported the cover-up, received attention to their reports and dug well down into the details of the underlying events of the attacks in Benghazi and the decisions made about those attacks. They have their major diversion handed to them by mommy nature and they’ll be making the most of it, thank you very much. They’ve more or less reached homeplate, at least as regards their aim at the re-election of their favorite Barry Obama on Nov. 6th. (He’ll lose nevertheless — doubling the waste of his media’s efforts and the depth of the injury they’ve done to their nation. The Fools.)

    Moreover, with the Sandy story front and center these major Obama media outlets (should we call them retain-lets? shield-lets?) can begin to trickle out bits and pieces of the larger picture, spread out in tiny asides over the next two weeks in order to cover their own asses, when, after the election, the larger story reappears (unexpectedly!) as Congressional Committees hold hearings and issue findings and people awake to raise their heads to recognition of the outrages committed against their country. Thus will these major Obama media (cum-lets?) (stain-lets?) make pretense to a claim to keep their dignity. Of course they’ll disregard all the respects in which they have already surrendered every scrap of their honor as institutions, supposing they had such a thing to begin with. No, their honor is intact in their view, even as they lied by omission for the last six weeks, lied straight down to today; for they have only the best intentions and that’s all honor is, right?

  84. Pingback: Bombshell: Benghazi Targets Painted, Air Support Overhead – Obama Calls Off Strike « Read and Right

  85. How any of these shit-lets can ignore Charles Woods is beyond me legitimate explanation. He’s a remarkable man. But oh, how they loved Cindy Sheehan.

  86. “Seal it off” has never had quite the same implication.

  87. Pingback: Trevor Loudon's New Zeal Blog

  88. Pingback: Presidential Depraved Indifference

  89. Obama media outlets (should we call them retain-lets? shield-lets?)


  90. FLASH: Coincidental to Hams removal from his command, lets not forget to look deeply into the removal of a Rear Admiral from his command of an aircraft carrier strike group stationed in the Middle East, a stones throw from Benghazi. It should not go unnoticed. Also, when Sad Sack Panetta named General Ham he also named General Dempsey, who seems to be of the proper political mettle to ride out any attempt to sack him. He is chief of the JCOS. But he clearly is the right kind of political soldier that this administration covets.

  91. Pingback: Benghazi... After today's revalations...

  92. Pingback: Presidential Depraved Indifference | askmarion