Showing posts with label World. Show all posts
Showing posts with label World. Show all posts

Tuesday, May 06, 2014

POST-STERLING, WHAT IS THE NBA GOING TO DO WITH THE OTHER RACISTS? Nazi-Fan Tony Parker, For Instance

Well, Mark Levin called this one last week.

It is going to be hard for the NBA to discipline Mr Sterling without establishing principles of draconian justice that will ramify inconveniently for other personalities in the league. This includes many athletes and owners now calling for Mr Sterling’s head...


...Last year Tony Parker, the French guard for the San Antonio Spurs, made a quenelle salute, created and popularised by the French comedian Dieudonné. The quenelle has become beloved of Holocaust deniers and anti-Semites, some of whom have been filmed making the gesture outside concentration camps, Holocaust memorials and synagogues. Is there a place for Parker in the NBA? Feminist groups have in recent years eyed the league’s sexual harassment policies.


It will probably not be hard to make the case that Mr Sterling is a lout. What will be hard is making the case that he is the only lout in the NBA.

So, Commissioner Adam Silver. Lifetime ban for the Hitler fan?


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.


THE PUPPETMASTERS: Meet The Radical Billionaires Controlling the Democrat Party

Guest post by Tori Richards

This weekend, a shadowy leftist group named Democracy Alliance will meet in Chicago to figure out a way to thwart conservative rivals.

As the adage goes, imitation is the most sincere form of flattery.

While top liberal organizations blast the right for accepting dark money, the Alliance’s entire business model is based on maintaining secrecy akin to the Illuminati.

“Like a lot of elite groups, we fly beneath the radar,” Oakland lawyer and Alliance donor Guy Saperstein told the Washington Post in 2006, a year after the group was formed. “We are not so stupid though (to) deny our existence.”

The group requires some hefty financial backing. It costs $25,000 just to join, yearly dues of $30,000 and an additional $200,000 donation to Alliance causes. Donation recipients must sign confidentiality agreements, the Post reported.

The Alliance was founded by a group of billionaires, including George Soros and philanthropist Peter B. Lewis, as a result of George W. Bush’s re-election. Its goal was to fund think tanks and media organizations to move societal change toward a more socialist agenda. But the focus changed to funding political endeavors after Vice President Joe Biden asked for help in 2011 for the upcoming election.

Obama’s campaign and his umbrella activist group Organizing for Action have received millions from Democracy Alliance members.

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.


Obama's 3-Part Benghazi Strategy: Lie, Lie, and Lie Again

Guest post by Investor's Business Daily

Scandal: Newly obtained emails on Benghazi show then-U.N. Ambassador Susan Rice was coached by a key White House aide to lie and ignore the facts known and reported on the ground to make the administration look good.

The fish rots from the head, as the saying goes, and no further proof is needed than a Sept. 14, 2012, email from Ben Rhodes, an assistant to the president and deputy national security adviser for strategic communications, contained in more than 100 pages of documents released by Judicial Watch and obtained in a Freedom of Information Act request.

That email, with the subject line: "RE: PREP Call with Susan: Saturday at 4:00 p.m. ET," was sent to other key White House staffers such as then-Communications Director David Plouffe and Press Secretary Jay Carney the day before now-National Security Adviser Susan Rice made her whirlwind tour on five Sunday news show appearances to specifically and emphatically blame an Internet video for the Sept. 11, 2012, attack on the American diplomatic mission in Benghazi, Libya, in which U.S. Ambassador Christopher Stevens and three other nationals were killed.

One of the goals listed in the emails was the need for Rice "to underscore that these protests are rooted in an Internet video, and not a broader failure or policy." She was also to "reinforce the President and Administration's strength and steadiness in dealing with difficult challenges." Her job was not to tell the truth, but to put lipstick on the Obama administration's Benghazi pig.

INTERNET SMACKDOWN O' THE DAY: Benghazi Edition

Over at The Daily Beast, investigative journalist Eli Lake has been doing yeoman's work exposing the Obama administration's scandals to otherwise clueless Newsweek readers (Lake is responsible for the Beast's inclusion on The Top 150 Conservative Websites, an admittedly controversial move on my part).

Lake's reporting on the latest Benghazi revelations is articulate, factual and damning. As any rational observer could have predicted -- and the latest emails now prove -- the White House lied to the faces of the Benghazi victims' families, lied to the American public, and lied to Congress about the nature of the attack.

Oh, and as an added bonus, President Obama and Hillary Clinton tossed an innocent filmmaker in the clink to reinforce their cover story.

No matter. The point of this particular post -- I'm rambling, I know -- is the commentary following Lake's revelations. An ever-dwindling number of Obama defenders, drones, sycophants, and other miscreants are still attempting to defend the indefensible.

Like this schmuck, who goes by the handle "Leftcoastnative" (a liberal in California? Who knew?):

Here's what republicans would have said if the Benghazi attack had happened on a republican president's watch, and if the Secretary of State's name hadn't been "Clinton."

(crickets.........crickets..........crickets........ crickets.........)

Somewhere deep in the recesses of congressional republicans' digital trash cans, are the deleted e-mails that said: "Whatever you do, don't mention the fact that we cut the State Department's security budget by half a billion dollars in the two yeas before Benghazi, and be sure we keep calling it a consulate even though we all know it was a CIA station."

"And just for the heck of it, let's not mention that Stevens was our point man with the Libyan rebels before he was Ambassador. It might muddy the water. Oh.....if someone asks what the heck the ambassador was doing at a lightly defended CIA station in Benghazi on the anniversary of 9/11 instead of tucked away safe and sound at the embassy in Tripoli, just pivot to the IRS or Fast and Furious."

Regarding the State Department's security budget, that tired canard -- first marketed by the dumbest Vice President in American history -- was long ago refuted by the State Department itself:

In testimony Wednesday before the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform, Charlene Lamb, a deputy assistant secretary of state for diplomatic security, was asked, “Was there any budget consideration and lack of budget which led you not to increase the number of people in the security force there?”

Lamb responded, “No, sir.”

Recall that Lamb is the person who denied requests from the top diplomatic security officer in Libya to retain a 16-man team of military personnel who had been protecting diplomats.

But the funniest smackdown of Leftcoastnative's central contention was proferred by "F_this_State":

@Leftcoastnative: I think it's amazing that so many liberals know what would happen in this imaginary alternate universe where a republican got elected instead of obama. You should all really go find a scientist, tell them you can see into alternate realities, and then prove that you can. You'd win a nobel prize for sure, and advance humanity into a new golden age.

It's just amazing that so many people have access to all the multiple universes and never told anyone. The physics community is going to be ecstatic.

And as it pertains to Benghazi, my primary question remains unanswered.

The same Leftist twits who reveled in George W. Bush reading My Pet Goat for seven minutes during the 9/11 attacks (as it turns out, at Secret Service request to prepare for a safe evacuation route to Air Force One) haven't once asked what Barack Obama did for 12 hours after being notified his Ambassador was about to be kidnapped or murdered.


Hat tip: BadBlue News.

Tuesday, April 29, 2014

Krauthammer on the sad, amoral, and pathetic excuse for a human being known as Hillary Clinton

Dr. Krauthammer about sums it up.

I find the most scandalous element of this from purely just a human point of view, is the fact that the Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, with the bodies of the dead lying in front of her and with the families there, brought up the video and said a video with which we had nothing to do, and then according to one of the family members, when she went over to console that family member, she said ‘We’re going to get the guy who did the video.’


Now, that to me, if she knew that this was a phony story and I’m not sure I can understand how it would be otherwise, is a form of deception that I think is truly scandalous.

The back-story, for those who may have missed it, is here.