Showing posts with label War. Show all posts
Showing posts with label War. Show all posts

Thursday, May 08, 2014

HILLARY BLASTED FOR "GROSS HYPOCRISY": Despite Pleas, Refused to Name Boko Haram as Terrorist Group

Guest post by Investor's Business Daily

Dereliction: For two years on Hillary Clinton's watch, the State Department refused to designate a Nigerian Islamist group as a terrorist organization. This group has murdered thousands as it wages a real war on women.

Sometimes Hollywood celebrities get it right, as Jay Leno, Ellen DeGeneres and others did in a protest outside the Beverly Hills Hotel. That property is one of the Dorchester Collection of hotels owned by the Sultan of Brunei, Hassanal Bolkiah, who has announced his country's embrace of Shariah law.

The protesters recognize that Shariah law is a brutal criminal code employed by Islamists that prescribes amputations and floggings, plus the stoning to death of those who violate its rules or simply for the crime of being too Western.

Case in point: the Nigerian terrorist group Boko Haram, which means "Western education is a sin."

When the Global Terrorism Database of the University of Maryland's National Consortium for the Study of Terrorism and Responses to Terrorism compiled its list of terrorist organizations and ranked them by the number of their terror acts in 2012, Afghanistan's Taliban came in first. Boko Haram was not far behind.

The world's attention is now focused on the kidnapping of some 300 girls from the Chibok Government Girls Secondary School in Lagos, Nigeria.

"I abducted your girls," a man claiming to be Abubakar Shekau, the group's leader, said in a video seen by the Guardian newspaper. "I will sell them in the market, by Allah. I will sell them off and marry them off. There is a market for selling humans."

Former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton has joined the campaign to free the girls, expressing her concern in a May 4 tweet with the hashtag "BringBackOurGirls." On Wednesday, she called the abduction "abominable" and "criminal."

"It's an act of terrorism," she said, "and it really merits the fullest response possible, first and foremost from the government of Nigeria."

Yet for two years, the State Department refused to acknowledge the growing threat and barbarism of Boko Haram. As Josh Rogin at The Daily Beast reports, the Clinton State Department "refused to place Boko Haram on the list of foreign terrorist organizations in 2011" after the group bombed the United Nations headquarters in Abuja, Nigeria.

Veteran Rep. Tom Cotton Destroys Democrats and Their Fake Outrage Over the Politics of Benghazi

As The Right Scoop observes, Cotton should have dropped the mic when he finished decimating the disgusting tactics of the Left.

Mr. Speaker, couple lessons I learned in the Army were you moved to the sound of gunfire and the most important step in the troop leading procedures is to supervise the execution of you orders.

When Americans were fighting for their lives in Benghazi, Barack Obama did neither. He sent no quick reaction force and didn’t even stay in the situation room to supervise the execution of his orders. We expect more from the lieutenants in the army than our president gave us that night.

For two years he’s covered up this failure of leadership by stonewalling. Not anymore. We will now get to the truth.

But what do our colleagues on the other side of the aisle say to this? They express great outrage at politicizing this matter.

When I was leading troops in Iraq in 2006, men and women who were being shot at and blown up by al Qaeda, where was the outrage as they fundraised endlessly off the Iraq war?

Where was the outrage as they viciously attacked our commanders?

Where was the outrage when they said soldiers were war criminals?

Where was the outrage when they said the war was lost?

Where was the outrage when they said only high school dropouts join the Army?

Forgive me if I don’t join my democratic colleagues in their fake outrage. Four Americans lost their lives that night in Benghazi. They deserve justice and the American people deserve the truth.

One other lesson I learned in the Army is that we leave no man behind. And we will not leave these four men behind.

That's what these disgusting losers on the Left don't seem to understand.

Men were fighting for their lives, fighting for hours against hundreds of Al Qaeda-linked terrorists, screaming into comm systems for help because they knew -- they knew -- a Commander-In-Chief would never leave anyone behind.

But they were wrong.

The President and Secretary of State Hillary Clinton were AWOL. It was 3AM in Benghazi... and no one answered their calls for help.

Where the hell were they?


Hat tip: BadBlue News

Wednesday, May 07, 2014

SUH-PRIZE, SUH-PRIZE: Hillary Clinton Wants the Benghazi Scandal to Just Disappear

Of course, one would expect this kind of response from miscreants who left American heroes to die on the battlefield awaiting help that would never come.

...Secretary of State Hillary Clinton said Wednesday there’s “no reason” to continue making inquiries into the 2012 terrorist attack.

“Of course there are a lot of reasons why, despite all of the hearings, all of the information that’s been provided, some choose not to be satisfied and choose to continue to move forward,” Clinton said. “That’s their choice. And I do not believe there is any reason for it to continue in this way, but they get to call the shots in the Congress.”

A select committee has been formed in Congress with seven Republicans and five Democrats, led by Rep. Trey Gowdy (R., S.C.) to try to get to the bottom of the assault and any White House cover-up to shield President Obama and Clinton herself, who was Secretary of State when the attack happened.

Hillary Clinton is trying to position herself as a moderate, but she is anything but.

She is the Grandmother of Obamacare and her past involves in so much skulduggery that her closet contains a whole damn mausoleum.

She is a radical Leftist whose policies would be every bit as corrupt and destructive as those of Barack Hussein Milhaus Obama.


Hat tip: Weasel Zippers

Tuesday, May 06, 2014

TED CRUZ: Dude, The Truth Isn't Partisan

Guest post by Rob Bluey

Sen. Ted Cruz, R-Texas, is frustrated by the Obama administration’s “stonewalling” on the Benghazi investigation – and he wants answers about the 2012 terrorist attack.

Speaking to Fox News’ Neil Cavuto yesterday, Cruz said: “We have four dead Americans. We have the first dead U.S. Ambassador killed in service since 1979. In the 19 months that have followed, we don’t have a single dead terrorist or a single terrorist apprehended, and what we have seen from the president and Senate Democrats has been stonewalling.”

Here are the four questions Cruz wants the Obama administration to answer:

  1. Why did the State Department repeatedly refuse to provide additional security as was requested by personnel on the ground?
  2. Why did the United States not have military assets in place to protect American men and women on Sept. 11, 2012, when there was increased terrorist activity in the region?
  3. During the Benghazi attack, why didn’t the United States send in forces to protect the four men who lost their lives?
  4. In the 19 months that have followed, why has no one been apprehended, and no one been brought to justice?

Last year, Cruz introduced a Senate resolution calling for a joint select committee to investigate the Benghazi attacks. The House of Representatives is moving forward with its own select committee, which will be led by Rep. Trey Gowdy, R-S.C.

“The truth shouldn’t be partisan,” Cruz said. “Finding out what happened, finding out how we could have prevented it, and acting to actually apprehend these guys, should not be partisan.”


Related: Q&A: Does a Benghazi Select Committee Matter?

Attkisson: Former Obama Officials and the Media--But I Repeat Myself--Trying to ‘Controversialize’ Benghazi

Guest post by Havilah Steinman

Former CBS News investigative reporter Sharyl Attkisson suggested today that those in the White House orbit were involved in a “well-orchestrated strategy to controversialize” the recent coverage about the Obama administration’s e-mails regarding the Benghazi talking points in the immediate aftermath.

Two former Obama administration officials, Tommy Vietor and David Plouffe, have appeared on Fox News and ABC News in recent days to downplay the attention surrounding the Benghazi-related e-mails.

After watching a clip that included Plouffe, Attkisson told Fox News today, “The key words they use, such as ‘conspiracy’ and ‘delusional,’ are in my opinion clearly designed to try to controversialize a story — a legitimate news story and a legitimate area of journalistic inquiry.”

“I see that as a well-orchestrated strategy,” she added, “to controversialize a story they really don’t want to hear about.”



Hat tip: BadBlue News

STRATFOR: Europe's Buffer States Must Arm and Ally

Guest post by George Friedman

I will be leaving this week to visit a string of countries that are now on the front line between Russia and the European Peninsula: Poland, Slovakia, Hungary, Romania, Serbia and Azerbaijan. A tour like that allows you to look at the details of history. But it is impossible to understand those details out of context. The more I think about recent events, the more I realize that what has happened in Ukraine can only be understood by considering European geopolitics since 1914 -- a hundred years ago and the beginning of World War I.

In The Guns of August, Barbara Tuchman wrote a superb and accurate story about how World War I began. For her it was a confluence of perception, misperception, personality and decisions. It was about the leaders, and implicit in her story was the idea that World War I was the result of miscalculation and misunderstanding. I suppose that if you focus on the details, then the war might seem unfortunate and avoidable. I take a different view: It was inevitable from the moment Germany united in 1871. When it happened and exactly how it happened was perhaps up to decision-makers. That it would happen was a geopolitical necessity. And understanding that geopolitical necessity gives us a framework for understanding what is happening in Ukraine, and what is likely to happen next.

The German Problem

The unification of Germany created a nation-state that was extraordinarily dynamic. By the turn of the 20th century, Germany had matched the British economy. However, the British economy pivoted on an empire that was enclosed and built around British interests. Germany had no such empire. It had achieved parity through internal growth and exports on a competitive basis. This was just one of the problems Germany had. The international economic system was based on a system of imperial holdings coupled with European industrialism. Germany lacked those holdings and had no politico-military control over its markets. While its economy was equal to Britain's, its risks were much higher.

Economic risk was compounded by strategic risk. Germany was on the North European Plain, relatively flat, with only a few north-south rivers as barriers. The Germans had the Russians to the east and the French to the west. Moscow and Paris had become allies. If they were to simultaneously attack Germany at a time of their choosing, Germany would be hard-pressed to resist. The Germans did not know Russo-French intentions, but they did know their capabilities. If there was to be war, the Germans had to strike first in one direction, achieve victory there and then mass their forces on the other side.

When that war would be fought, which strategy the Germans chose and ultimately whether it would succeed were uncertainties. But unlike Tuchman's view of the war, a war that began with a German strike was inevitable. The war was not the result of a misunderstanding. Rather, it was the result of economic and strategic realities.

Monday, May 05, 2014

As Economy Stumbles and War in Europe Nears, a Very, Very Busy President Tweets Out an Important Message

I truly wish this had been a Biff Spackle original and not an official White House tweet. But real it is.


A record number of Americans have dropped out of the workforce, the Secretary of State is encouraging Muslim terror attacks on innocent Israeli civilians, no one knows what the president did for 10 hours after he learned his Ambassador to Libya was missing, the economy has flatlined, Vladimir Putin is reenacting Adolf Hitler's moves from the 1930s, radical leftist billionaires are preventing America from becoming energy independent, and illegal immigration is ripping America to shreds.

And the White House staff is busy photoshopping the president sitting on the Iron Throne.


Hat tip: Western Journalism

A BOYCOTT OF THE SELECT COMMITTEE ON BENGHAZI? For Democrats, Party Always Comes Before Country

Guest post by Investor's Business Daily

Scandal: A Democratic member of the House intelligence committee called Sunday for his party to boycott the newly announced select committee that will probe the Benghazi terrorist attacks, calling it "a colossal waste of time."

Almost as soon as "Benghazi, Benghazi, Benghazi" had fallen from the lips of House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi — a reprise of former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton's "What difference at this point does it make?" — Rep. Adam Schiff, D-Calif., told Chris Wallace on "Fox News Sunday" that he thinks the planned select committee to investigate the 2012 Benghazi attack is a "colossal waste of time" and suggested that Democrats not participate in it.

The congressman responded to Speaker John Boehner's announcement that a special committee to investigate Benghazi, and the cover-up that followed, by dismissing claims that new emails were "smoking gun" evidence that the inflammatory video excuse was concocted to safeguard President Obama's re-election and Hillary's future candidacy.

Calling the yet-to-be-approved committee a "tremendous red herring," Schiff said: "I don't think it makes sense, really, for Democrats to participate." After all, we got the maker of the video, as Hillary Clinton promised the parents of the dead while their son's casket arrived at Andrews Air Force Base outside Washington, D.C.

Former White House adviser David Plouffe, speaking on ABC's "This Week," called the committee "bogus." He was one of the recipients of a Sept. 14, 2012, email from Ben Rhodes, an assistant to the president and deputy national security adviser for strategic communications, discussing the prepping of U.N. Ambassador Susan Rice before her whirlwind tour of five Sunday talk shows to specifically and emphatically blame an Internet video for the attack.

YET ANOTHER CONSTITUTIONAL CRISIS: White House Suggests It Will Ignore Select Committee on Benghazi

I've lost count. How many Constitutional Crises does this make?

White House Press Secretary Jay Carney today indicated the White House will refuse to cooperate with a new House committee tasked with investigating Benghazi.

“We have always cooperated with legitimate oversight,” Carney said this afternoon during the daily White House briefing. Asked whether the panel qualified as “legitimate,” he said: “I think if you look at what even some Republicans have said, it certainly casts doubt on the legitimacy of an effort that is so partisan in nature.”

“You know, at some point, you just have to assume that Republicans will continue this because it feeds a political objective of some sort,” he added. “At the same time you have to ask, ‘What about the American people who want to see Congress work for them?’”

What about the American people who wanted to see the Commander-in-Chief attempt to rescue them from a half-day long terror attack? You know, all of the dead and grievously wounded at Benghazi waiting for military back-up that would never come?

Simple question for the Democrats:

Has a president ever gone AWOL for 10 hours (that's 100 My Pet Goats, fat boy) after a U.S. Ambassador was reported missing and dozens of American diplomats were facing imminent death during a terror attack?

That's a rhetorical question for you drones: the answer is no.

If Obama does indeed refuse to cooperate with Congressional oversight, it will be more than past time to initiate impeachment proceedings. More conservatives in the House and Republican control of the Senate will go along way towards making that a reality.


Hat tip: BadBlue News

Sunday, May 04, 2014

JANINE TURNER: Gorgeous And Brilliant

Janine Turner just hit a grand-slam.

The number one threat to our republic is not the debt, is not the entitlements, is not invasion from another country. The number one threat to our country is lust. It is not a sexual lust. It is a lust for power. Since time began, the lust for power and its ruthlessness has ruined liberty, derailed democracy, wrecked republicanism, crippled nations and killed millions. The paths have been many but the goal singular — lust, lust for power.

Our founders knew firsthand how the lust for power corrupted human rights. They knew that, to quote James Madison, “men are not angels.” Thus, they created a government of checks and balances that would keep tyranny at bay. According to the Constitution, one branch of government can never usurp the other and no one branch can be autonomous.

There has been, and is, a faction amongst us that wants to change the fundamental structure of these checks — the progressives. The progressives don’t want a multi-tiered, self-checking and self-limiting government. They want an all-powerful, singular nexus of decision-making in the executive branch, free from checks and balances...

...Their mission is to eradicate the potency of the U.S. Congress, thus eliminating the utterly crucial check on executive power. They accomplish this by diminishing the reputation of the legislative branch and thus crippling its power and effectiveness. Our legislators fell for this in 1912. They are falling for it again and they are taking the American people with them.

Progressives had astonishing results in 1912 and 1913 with the 17th Amendment. Progressives managed to convince the state legislatures and the U.S senators that they were, themselves, corrupt. They convinced them to vote for their own demise. In the late 1800s, patient and premeditated, the progressives had planted a negative Senate public-relations campaign to germinate into the nucleus of the culture. With political comments such as “the Senate is dictated by special interests” and “the Senate is ineffectual,” the progressives fanned the flames of destruction.

They manipulated a masterful coup in the Senate, denying states’ rights, with a simple message – “The Senate is corrupted by special interest groups.” Sound familiar? It was simply stunning. Henceforth, the senators would no longer be appointed by the state legislators, but by the people. With this singular, monumental sweep of states’ rights, the Constitution, which they conveniently believe to be outdated, was thrown off-kilter.

Be aware: the progressive are not finished. They are enacting the same campaign today. Now instead of the Senate, the entire legislative branch is the problem. “The legislative branch prevents all good from taking place.” “The legislative branch is corrupt.” “The legislative branch is a bother.” “The legislative branch never gets anything done.” “The legislative branch is corrupted by special interest groups.” By beating down the legislative branch, the executive branch rises.

Read the whole damn thing.

And ask yourself: is it so difficult for a Republican leader to step up and articulate these issues as well as Ms. Turner?


Hat tip: BadBlue News

A TRUTHFUL VERSION OF THE OBAMA 2012 SLOGAN: "Chris Stevens is Dead and Al Qaeda is Alive"

Stephen F. Hayes offers an incisive summary of the fraud perpetrated against the victims' families and the American people regarding the Benghazi attacks.

At the same time the White House was putting the video at the center of the Benghazi story, intelligence professionals and U.S. officials on the ground in Libya were describing a precise attack carried out by al Qaeda-affiliated terrorists. The Weekly Standard has learned that an analysis from the Defense Intelligence Agency produced a day before Rhodes sent his email assigned blame for the attacks to Al Qaeda in the Islamic Maghreb and Ansar al Sharia Libya. The DIA analysis did not mention a video. It adds to the still-growing body of memos and warnings from top U.S. officials. The top U.S. intelligence official on the ground in Libya repeatedly told officials in Washington that the Benghazi attacks were part of a planned assault by al Qaeda-affiliated terrorists. The top diplomat in the country said the same thing. Last week, a top intelligence official for AFRICOM told Congress that he shared that view.

We are left with this reality: Top diplomats and intelligence officers in Libya offered assessments of the Benghazi attacks that were true when they made them and remain true today. But top Obama administration officials ignored those assessments. Six weeks before the 2012 presidential election, those officials—at the direction of White House communications and political strategists desperate to maintain the fiction that al Qaeda was “on the run”—lied to the public about how four Americans were killed in a sophisticated attack carried out, on the anniversary of 9/11, by terrorists affiliated with al Qaeda.

Andrew C. McCarthy rolls back the fraud even further, painting a compelling case that the unknown filmmaker's video was not the cause of any of the 9/11/12 violence, including that which occurred in Cairo.

POLL: What was Barack Obama doing for 10 hours after learning of the Benghazi attacks?

A new poll courtesy of @BiffSpackle:



Remember all of the liberal criticism of George W. Bush reading My Pet Goat (I'm talking to you, fat boy) after being alerted by aides that the World Trade Center was under attack? Never mentioned by the liberal loons: Bush was asked by the Secret Service to give them some time to secure an evacuation route to Air Force One. So he read the book to the schoolkids for a total of six whole minutes.

The criticism from the Left was deafening.

Yet, in Benghazi, we can't even find out what the President was doing for 10 hours after learning of the attacks, leaving Americans to die awaiting a rescue that would never come.

10 hours, or 100 My Pet Goats.

Talk amongst yourselves.


Saturday, May 03, 2014

LIMBAUGH: Watergate is Benghazi. Except this time, Woodward and Bernstein are helping Nixon cover it up.

Rush Limbaugh:

What we’re watching here today is the equivalent of Woodward and Bernstein helping Nixon cover up Watergate. The mainstream media is Woodward and Bernstein. Watergate is Benghazi. Except this time, Woodward and Bernstein are helping Nixon cover it up.

The media are not interested in this at all. They don't really think there is anything, and those of them who do know that there's something here want to cover it up. Now, the media are made up of a lot of stupid people. And the media are made up of a lot of uninformed people and the media are made up of a lot of people with a lot of prejudice. And there are a lot of reporters who will discount Benghazi simply because of who is interested in it. For example, Fox is interested in it and it automatically is nothing. If I'm interested in it it doesn't rate any interest, because Fox and me, all we want is to get Obama.

That's how prejudiced they are and short minded. You have some of the media who know full well what they're doing and they're working with the regime to cover it up. Then you have real activists in the media who know exactly what happened and who fear the truth coming out and are going to do everything they can to protect Obama, including trying to lay the blame off on Republicans somehow or the military, or the video that nobody ever saw...

The memo shows that the White House knew exactly what happened and was trying to protect Obama from it, with Susan Rice being briefed. And Dr. Krauthammer says that's the equivalent of the Nixon tapes being discovered.

The Nixon tapes were big. The 18-minute gap, Rose Mary Wood, the secretary, Nixon taping all the people, Haldeman and Ehrlichman. It's what enabled Woodward and Bernstein to go. I still like my comparison that the Drive-Bys of today are the equivalent of Woodward and Bernstein helping to cover it up. When Dr. Krauthammer says the other media are somewhat embarrassed because they allowed themselves to be stoned spun and rolled for a year and a half. Now the memo appears, it's obvious they missed the story....

The media and the administration official in the White House were both ragging on Fox. They were watching Fox. They were watching the O'Reilly Factor and they were e-mailing each other back and forth. O'Reilly was going back and forth how Benghazi was a big thing and the media was missing it and clearly the video had nothing to do with it. And these two people, one a Drive-By reporter, the other an administration official, were both writing back and forth about what B.S. Fox was talking about...

AP reporter Matt Lee and Regime official Victoria Nuland, State Department, were writing back and forth. E-mails to each other about what a bunch of B.S. is on Fox as O'Reilly is discounting the Regime theory on the video explaining why there were protests in Benghazi and that's why the Ambassador is dead. So the point is you have a State Department official writing back and forth with a news media person, Matt Lee. If you read it, it's clear that Matt Lee from the Associated Press is offering his assistance to the regime.

My only point in bringing this up is the media didn't have to be spun. The media didn't have to be rolled. I'm not criticizing Krauthammer, please don't misunderstand. I'm disagreeing with the role of the media here. They're totally already in the Obama camp. They are Obamaites first and journalists second. They're liberal Democrats first and journalists second. They're not even journalists anymore. So you have Victoria Nuland at the State Department and this Matt Lee guy and they're watching O'Reilly and O'Reilly is making all the sense in the world about the video not being responsible for anything here, and these two people are writing back and forth about what a bunch of B.S. is on Fox.

Now, the AP reporter, he doesn't know from anything. He's not asking the State Department babe, "Hey, is what I'm hearing on Fox right?" He's not asking the government official, "Hey, could O'Reilly have a point here? Maybe the video doesn't have anything --" No, the AP reporter was already in bed with the State Department official, and they were already conspiring with each other on how to make sure nobody believed the Fox report or the Fox version of things. They wanted to make sure that the Fox version of things remained marginalized and isolated. I don't think the media has to be spun, and I don't think they're embarrassed now. I don't think there's any regret that they missed this story.

The regret is they weren't able to successfully cover it up. If anything, the Drive-By media is gnashing its teeth over the fact that the original Fox and anti-standard media version of this, my version, is the one that's real, that the regime has been lying. They're mad that that has been learned. So now they've gotta cover it up. So we're into the cover up of a cover-up now. The media is not interested in the truth of this story. They never have been. This has been a circle the wagons event from the get-go. From the night of the Benghazi attack, this has been a circle the wagons moment. Now they've gotta do it again.


Hat tip: BadBlue News

ANOTHER NEW LOW FOR JOHN KERRY: "We need another intifada" to force Israel to surrender its sovereignty

And you thought John Kerry had already hit rock bottom, n'est ce pas?

In anonymous briefing to top columnist, members of Kerry’s team slam Netanyahu, empathize with Abbas, warn Palestine will rise ‘whether through violence or via int’l organizations’


American officials directly involved in the failed Israeli-Palestinian peace process over the last nine months gave a leading Israeli columnist a withering assessment of Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s handling of the negotiations, indicated that Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas has completely given up on the prospect of a negotiated solution, and warned Israel that the Palestinians will achieve statehood come what may — either via international organizations or through violence...

...One bitter American official told Barnea, “I guess we need another intifada to create the circumstances that would allow progress...”

...In a rare attribution of some blame to Abbas, the Americans said they “couldn’t understand why it bothered him so much” to recognize Israel as a Jewish state. But here too, ultimately, the Americans were empathetic to Abbas: “The Palestinians came to the conclusion that Israel was pulling a nasty trick on them. They suspected there was an effort to get from them approval of the Zionist narrative.

...Israel can expect to face international isolation and possible sanctions from countries and companies across the world if Netanyahu fails to endorse a framework agreement with the Palestinians, Obama cautioned in an interview with Bloomberg at the time. If Netanyahu “does not believe that a peace deal with the Palestinians is the right thing to do for Israel, then he needs to articulate an alternative approach,” Obama said then. “There comes a point where you can’t manage this anymore, and then you start having to make very difficult choices,” he said.

The president went on to condemn Israel’s settlement activities in the West Bank, and said that though his allegiance to the Jewish state was permanent, building settlements across the Green Line was counterproductive and would make it extremely difficult for the US to defend Israel from painful repercussions in the international community. “If you see no peace deal and continued aggressive settlement construction — and we have seen more aggressive settlement construction over the last couple years than we’ve seen in a very long time — if Palestinians come to believe that the possibility of a contiguous sovereign Palestinian state is no longer within reach, then our ability to manage the international fallout is going to be limited,” Obama warned.

Late last year, Kerry -- whose face has been distorted by repeated failed plastic surgeries and now resembles that of Mr. Potato Head -- lashed out at Israel and mentioned the possibility of a "Third Intifida" (i.e., a wave of mass murders of innocent women and children).

Never before, to my knowledge, has an American diplomat hoped for a wave of mass murder on the civilian population of an ally.

I placed the map of Israel above for a reason. The purple borders illustrate how Egypt and Jordan could tear down their security walls and thereby allow Palestinians freedom in Arab lands.

Why doesn't John Kerry talk about that? Why doesn't Barack Obama mention that?

We know why. Indeed, we know exactly why.


Hat tip: BadBlue News

Friday, May 02, 2014

BEN RHODES HITS THE QUADFECTA: Email Breakdown

Thanks to JudicialWatch (PDF), we have the original email from White House propagandist Ben Rhodes regarding the Benghazi cover-up.

Check out the four talking points, annotated by @BiffSpackle:


Oh, my.


Related: May 10, 2013: Ted Cruz has 12 Questions for Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton.

TOMMY VIETOR COMIX in "Dude, where's my van?"

Via our summer intern, @BiffSpackle and based on a true story.


Methinks Mr. Vietor will soon be back living in his van, down by the river.


JAY CARNEY: Man Without Shame

Guest post by Investor's Business Daily

Benghazi Cover-Up: The administration's tangled web of deceit now includes lying about prior lies as the White House press secretary tries to cover up its cover-up of why four Americans died in a terrorist attack.

No, that was not Winston Smith, the rewriter of history working for the Ministry of Truth in George Orwell's classic novel "1984," tap-dancing once again before a no-longer-sycophantic White House press corps. Rather, it was that master storyteller, White House Press Secretary Jay Carney.

Carney shamefully continued to insist that when then-U.N. Ambassador Susan Rice went on five Sunday talk shows days after the 2012 attack to offer an untrue story that Benghazi was the result of an inflammatory video, she was acting on the best intelligence offered by the intelligence community.

Carney said this knowing that Mike Morell, CIA deputy director two years ago, testified before Congress and said the video story did not come from CIA analysts.

As for the emails that showed the administration's motives for the story were political, to protect a president running for re-election and a secretary of state that wanted to be his successor, Carney offered his entry for 2014 Lie Of The Year: The emails obtained by the watchdog group Judicial Watch in a lawsuit specifically seeking Benghazi documents weren't really about Benghazi.

Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton said in an interview on TheBlaze TV that the newly released emails bring questions about the slaughter "into the White House, and it shows that the idea that the CIA created the talking points that Susan Rice was using is a big fat lie."

In an argumentative exchange between Carney and ABC News' Jon Karl, Carney insisted that "if you look at the document in question here, it is not about Benghazi; it is about the protests around the Muslim world outside of U.S. embassies" and it was the general situation in the Middle East that Rice was being prepped for.

To his credit, Karl asked all the right questions in response to Carney's song and dance: "Why were you holding back this information? Why was this email not turned over to the Congress? Why was it not released when you released all the other emails?" and, of course, if what Carney was saying is true, why did it take a court case to get the unredacted email released?

Thursday, May 01, 2014

The Two Brothers at the Center of the Benghazi Cover-up

Guest post by Rob Bluey

The disclosure this week of a White House document on Benghazi has thrust CBS News into the spotlight for its coverage in the aftermath of the terrorist attack.

CBS News President David Rhodes is the brother of Ben Rhodes, the White House deputy national security adviser who drafted the newly released document about Benghazi just days after the Sept. 11, 2012, attack that killed four Americans. Ben Rhodes’s involvement was first revealed Tuesday when Judicial Watch obtained the document as part of a court case.

Last night, “CBS Evening News” did not cover the latest developments on the story, even though reporters peppered White House press secretary Jay Carney with questions earlier in the day.

The Washington Free Beacon reports CBS was the only evening newscast not to cover the latest details on Benghazi. The program instead covered “the weather, Oklahoma executions, and the arrest of a former Irish Republican Army operative.”

Earlier yesterday, Glenn Beck interviewed Sharyl Attkisson, a former CBS News investigative reporter, about the Benghazi disclosure and the Rhodes brothers. Attkisson revealed that she sought the same Ben Rhodes document that Judicial Watch eventually obtained. CBS News, however, would not take the matter to court.

“CBS wasn’t willing to file a [Freedom of Information Act] lawsuit when I was there to try to get some of these documents,” Attkisson said.

Toothless John Boehner and Inspector Clouseau Issa outraged over Benghazi emails: plan strongly worded memo

The Keystone GOPs -- and of course I refer to Speaker John Boehner and House Oversight Chairman Darrell Issa -- have been proven utterly incompetent and quite possibly complicit with the Obama administration's myriad scandals.

Their refusal to name a Select Investigative Committee -- for either Benghazi or the weaponization of the IRS -- is an outrage and now an embarrassment. A private organization, Judicial Watch, secured the "Smoking Gun" emails that tied the White House directly to the cover-up foisted upon the victims' families and the American public.

Boehner and Issa look like either buffoons or accomplices. Which is not to rule out the possibility that they are both.

Suitably humiliated, Boehner is squealing like a stuck pig, claiming he's outraged -- outraged, I say -- that the Obama administration lied, stonewalled and illegally withheld evidence from his toothless circle twerk.

Speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio) on Thursday called on Secretary of State John Kerry to testify as to why a newly revealed email prepping Susan Rice for a series of television interviews was not handed over to Congress last year... Boehner said the White House or someone in the administration must explain why the email was not included when Congress subpoenaed documents and emails last year about the deadly terrorist attack in Benghazi, Libya, in 2012 that killed four Americans.

"If the White House won’t explain it, Secretary Kerry should come to the Capitol to explain why he defied an official congressional subpoena," Boehner said in a statement. "And the White House needs to understand that this investigation will not end until the entire truth is revealed and justice and accountability are served.”

Boehner said the withholding of the email constitutes the "most flagrant example yet of the administration's contempt for the American people’s right to know the truth about what happened when four Americans died in a fiery terrorist attack."

I'm surprised he didn't say, "It's a sad day" like his equally dimwitted counterpart in the Senate.

Darrell "Inspector Clouseau" (which is the nickname he prefers, I hear) Issa appears equally outraged!

[Issa] complained that the Benghazi documents recently released by the White House to Judicial Watch in response to their FOIA request, should have been turned over to Congress a year and a half ago.

...“The documents from Judicial Watch’s FOIA which was pursuant to our request more than over a year and a half ago, show a direct White House role outside of talking points prepared by the intelligence community... In pushing the false narrative that a YouTube video was responsible for the deaths of four brave Americans, it is disturbing and perhaps criminal that these documents — that documents like these — were hidden by the Obama administration from Congress and the public alike, particularly after Secretary Kerry pledged cooperation and the president himself told the American people in November of 2012 that, quote, ‘every bit of information we have on Benghazi has been provided,’” Issa said.

He noted that “the president himself said in November of 2012, that every bit of information that we have on Benghazi has been provided.”

I just emailed some of the Republican National Committee's public relations muckety-mucks, asking them what the official position is on a Select Committee on Benghazi. I fully expect an answer by 2037.

John "Amnesty" Boehner needs to go. He's not a leader; but he is a weakling, a coward, and a buffoon. And those are among his more positive traits. With all due respect.

As an aside, did you know that the last two credible challengers to John Boehner in Ohio's District 8 suddenly happened to lose their jobs?

But I'm sure that's just a coincidence.

But in case not, please support his conservative challenger, J.D. Winteregg.


Hat tip: BadBlue News.

Wednesday, April 30, 2014

Government-Media Incest Comix

Another keeper by our year-around summer intern, @BiffSpackle:


Just a reminder: you can always read the real, uncensored news at BadBlue. 24 x 7 x 365. Unfiltered by vintage media.