The Orange Mane -  a Denver Broncos Fan Community  

Go Back   The Orange Mane - a Denver Broncos Fan Community > Jibba Jabba > War, Religion and Politics Thread
Register FAQ Members List Calendar Chat Room Mark Forums Read



Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 05-14-2014, 09:27 PM   #826
DenverBrit
Just hanging out.
 
DenverBrit's Avatar
 
Got a breath mint??

Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Denver
Posts: 12,492

Adopt-a-Bronco:
The Team
Default

The National Review has no problem recounting the facts.

What the New Benghazi E-mails Show, and What They Don’t
By Patrick Brennan
April 30, 2014 12:34 AM

Quote:
Charles Krauthammer argued on Special Report tonight that the new Benghazi e-mails from the White House are a “smoking document,” but that the media will plead that the scandal is too complicated, so the issue is dead. Alas, the scandal is complicated enough that Krauthammer is either mistaken about the facts of what he calls “a classic cover-up of a cover-up,” or he’s eliding the details for his audience.

An e-mail revealed today shows a White House official recommending that U.N. ambassador Susan Rice play up the importance in the Benghazi attacks of an anti-Islam YouTube video that was mentioned in an unclassified summary from the intelligence community (the “talking points”), in order to help burnish the administration’s image. Krauthammer claims this demolishes the White House’s longstanding claim that “this stuff” — the involvement of the video — “all came from the CIA, or from intelligence, that it was completely clean.” What the batch of e-mails (most of which aren’t new, they can be read here) show is the opposite: that the CIA and the State Department assembled talking points pinning the attacks partly on the video, without any input from the White House.

Then the White House told Susan Rice to emphasize that the intelligence community had concluded, on balance, that an exogenous factor (the video) had caused the protests, and that administration policy (in terms of the stability of Libya and the fight against al-Qaeda) wasn’t to blame here.

“We now have the White House saying, ‘we’re pushing the video because we don’t want it to be blamed on the failure of our policies,’” Krauthammer says. That’s basically right, but “pushing the video” was playing up a questionable and politically convenient unclassified intelligence assessment after a horrible tragedy, not making something up or engaging in a cover-up.

The most straightforward thing, if the White House eschewed all political considerations, would have been to say it was a horrible event, heavily armed terrorists were involved, and an investigation was under way. Nothing more was known for sure. There probably were good policy reasons not to mention the involvement of al-Qaeda-linked groups, which was immediately suspected but not confirmed until much later. But of course the White House could have said that if they wanted, too, even though the intelligence community cut it from the talking points. (I suspect, if this White House were occupied by the other party, that conservatives would be more willing to accept the idea that the intelligence community simply gets things wrong, and that naming details and suspects should take a backseat to the safety of Americans abroad.)

Krauthammer also missteps when he says the YouTube explanation couldn’t have come from the intelligence community because deputy CIA director Michael Morell testified that the idea “didn’t come from him.” But Morell said under oath that his top CIA counterterror analyst wrote the original draft of the talking points, in which the agency concluded, on balance, the attacks had been intertwined with a video protest. Krauthammer says the video explanation has to have come from the State Department or the White House — Morell said it came from the intelligence community and that the White House never made any substantive comments.

The State Department did demand a watering-down of the talking points’ discussion of warnings before the attacks (presumably for self-interested reasons) and the involvement of al-Qaeda-tied groups, which they got from the CIA. The one remaining issue is why exactly the State Department demanded those changes, and how they got them done: The White House has tried to play this down, as I wrote last year, but State got lots of potentially controversial details taken out at the request not of an Obama appointee but career civil servant Victoria Nuland. There are reasonable if not satisfactory reasons for why State would have done that, but they could have done it to make themselves look good. That would be a scandal all its own — but not the one Benghazi theorists keep claiming is afoot. CIA officials, including Morell, generally have said they agreed to the edits State suggested, and it wasn’t forced. Maybe that’s all suspicious, and maybe the CIA or the Director of National Intelligence are horribly politicized and compromised — but they also make mistakes. We just don’t know. Meanwhile, Republicans, and Krauthammer in this instance, are trying to pretend the White House played a role that we have no evidence, just our own suspicions, to believe they did.

Krauthammer’s right that what we have here was obvious all along: On the totality of the evidence, the White House took the intelligence community and diplomatic community’s estimate, which was relatively uncertain, bereft of much detail, and turned out days later to be quite wrong, and played up certain parts of it to avoid questions about their counterterror strategy and the situation in Libya. That isn’t being as straightforward with the American public as they could or probably should have been; it’s also not a lie or a cover-up. Whether what we have adds up to the “serious offense” Krauthammer calls it is a subjective judgment — what’s not subjective is the facts we have.
http://www.nationalreview.com/corner...atrick-brennan
DenverBrit is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-17-2014, 12:09 AM   #827
Guess Who
Rookie
 
Guess Who's Avatar
 

Join Date: Sep 2013
Posts: 2,486

Adopt-a-Bronco:
PMFM
Default

Attached Images
File Type: jpg 10308119_720902731306273_3318737206189920169_n.jpg (19.8 KB, 59 views)
Guess Who is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-17-2014, 12:16 AM   #828
cutthemdown
A verbis ad verbera
 
cutthemdown's Avatar
 
Zimm to HOF

Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Long Beach
Posts: 36,890
Default

I think the bigger issue with this White House is how they have no problem hiding things, not taking responsiblity, manipulating the media through intimidation and using the govt power to attack the opposite political party.

They are joke considering how Obama said they would be so different.
cutthemdown is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-17-2014, 12:16 AM   #829
cutthemdown
A verbis ad verbera
 
cutthemdown's Avatar
 
Zimm to HOF

Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Long Beach
Posts: 36,890
Default

81 school shooting since Bengahzi? God please tell me our country not that ****ed up.
cutthemdown is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-17-2014, 08:00 AM   #830
Rohirrim
Partisan
 
Rohirrim's Avatar
 
All hail Hercules!

Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Twixt Hell & Highwater
Posts: 55,122

Adopt-a-Bronco:
Malik Jackson
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Guess Who View Post
81 school shootings!


Impeach Obama!!!
Rohirrim is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-17-2014, 03:01 PM   #831
barryr
Ring of Famer
 
New to the Forum

Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 9,732

Adopt-a-Bronco:
None
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by cutthemdown View Post
I think the bigger issue with this White House is how they have no problem hiding things, not taking responsiblity, manipulating the media through intimidation and using the govt power to attack the opposite political party.

They are joke considering how Obama said they would be so different.
The Obama backers used to spout that about Bush, but now, everything is ok since they really like abuses of the system, as long as their party is in charge of course. Remember how dissent was "cool" according to them. Now it must be silenced and threatened. They are so consistent in their views.
barryr is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-17-2014, 08:33 PM   #832
BroncoBeavis
Ring of Famer
 
BroncoBeavis's Avatar
 
New to the Forum

Join Date: Sep 2013
Posts: 3,437

Adopt-a-Bronco:
None
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by barryr View Post
The Obama backers used to spout that about Bush, but now, everything is ok since they really like abuses of the system, as long as their party is in charge of course. Remember how dissent was "cool" according to them. Now it must be silenced and threatened. They are so consistent in their views.
Yeah its amazing how quickly things went from "Bush lied people died" to "Well its not the Presidents fault because there was this one low level lackey who mighta sold him a bad story."

Virtually the whole intelligence community and even the prior President believed the WMDs were in Iraq. There's no coherent way to have it both ways.
BroncoBeavis is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-17-2014, 10:21 PM   #833
Bronco Bob
Tastee Freeze
 
Bronco Bob's Avatar
 

Join Date: Dec 2002
Posts: 9,525

Adopt-a-Bronco:
Montee Ball
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rohirrim View Post
If Romney is elected, he'll do it too.
Didn't realize how old this thread was until I looked at the date you posted this. Talk about beating a dead horse.
Bronco Bob is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-18-2014, 07:54 AM   #834
barryr
Ring of Famer
 
New to the Forum

Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 9,732

Adopt-a-Bronco:
None
Default

Reality is nothing will come of this in the end since the media does not want to know the truth about what happened and will make the story die, the democrats want to protect Obama and Hillary at all costs so continue with the stall game, and the republicans won't spend the time needed in the end. 4 Americans needlessly dead and we will just let it slide for political reasons. Such a proud moment.
barryr is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-18-2014, 08:05 AM   #835
peacepipe
Ring of Famer
 
New to the Forum

Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 7,067

Adopt-a-Bronco:
None
Default

Rethugs are on a smear campaign. They should call it the Sunday morning talk show investigation. Instead of looking what can be done to make sure this doesn't happen again,rethugs are fixated on Sunday talking points.
Every rethug claim about benghazi has been debunked.
peacepipe is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-18-2014, 11:20 AM   #836
The Lone Bolt
Ring of Famer
 
The Lone Bolt's Avatar
 
GO CHARGERS!!!!

Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: The Boredom Capital of the Universe (Everett, WA)
Posts: 3,259
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by BroncoBeavis View Post
Yeah its amazing how quickly things went from "Bush lied people died" to "Well its not the Presidents fault because there was this one low level lackey who mighta sold him a bad story."

Virtually the whole intelligence community and even the prior President believed the WMDs were in Iraq. There's no coherent way to have it both ways.
The political left were quick to accuse bush of "lying." You righties are equally quick to call Obama a "liar" over Benghazi. Neither side is justified in those accusations IMO.
The Lone Bolt is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-18-2014, 11:30 AM   #837
broncocalijohn
Famer of Rings
 
broncocalijohn's Avatar
 
I said Do It!

Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Lake Forest, Orange County, Calif.
Posts: 22,534

Adopt-a-Bronco:
Simon Fletcher
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by peacepipe View Post
Rethugs are on a smear campaign. They should call it the Sunday morning talk show investigation. Instead of looking what can be done to make sure this doesn't happen again,rethugs are fixated on Sunday talking points.
Every rethug claim about benghazi has been debunked.
Didn't this start to get out of control by Obama sending out own of his spokesholes on those same Sunday shows telling us about the attacks were based on a you tube video?
broncocalijohn is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-18-2014, 12:40 PM   #838
DenverBrit
Just hanging out.
 
DenverBrit's Avatar
 
Got a breath mint??

Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Denver
Posts: 12,492

Adopt-a-Bronco:
The Team
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by broncocalijohn View Post
Didn't this start to get out of control by Obama sending out own of his spokesholes on those same Sunday shows telling us about the attacks were based on a you tube video?
Read the National Review Article, it couldn't be clearer.

http://www.nationalreview.com/corner...atrick-brennan

Last edited by DenverBrit; 05-18-2014 at 12:58 PM..
DenverBrit is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-18-2014, 02:14 PM   #839
broncocalijohn
Famer of Rings
 
broncocalijohn's Avatar
 
I said Do It!

Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Lake Forest, Orange County, Calif.
Posts: 22,534

Adopt-a-Bronco:
Simon Fletcher
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by DenverBrit View Post
Read the National Review Article, it couldn't be clearer.

http://www.nationalreview.com/corner...atrick-brennan
So I guess we can go with that and also add that peacepipe can easily take out his smear of "repugs" and replace with "Democraps" or whatever cute name Republicans can come up with. After all, this seems to be something Obama had done on those same Sunday shows.....

From linked National Review article

"Krauthammer’s right that what we have here was obvious all along: On the totality of the evidence, the White House took the intelligence community and diplomatic community’s estimate, which was relatively uncertain, bereft of much detail, and turned out days later to be quite wrong, and played up certain parts of it to avoid questions about their counterterror strategy and the situation in Libya. That isn’t being as straightforward with the American public as they could or probably should have been; it’s also not a lie or a cover-up. Whether what we have adds up to the “serious offense” Krauthammer calls it is a subjective judgment — what’s not subjective is the facts we have."
broncocalijohn is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-18-2014, 02:41 PM   #840
peacepipe
Ring of Famer
 
New to the Forum

Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 7,067

Adopt-a-Bronco:
None
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by DenverBrit View Post
Read the National Review Article, it couldn't be clearer.

http://www.nationalreview.com/corner...atrick-brennan
At the end of the day it remains the same. Talking points! Could the White House or whoever done better? Yes. Is it worth 2 yrs of political smearing,20 million in tax payer money wasted on this kangaroo court? No.
peacepipe is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-18-2014, 02:55 PM   #841
baja
Happy camper
 
baja's Avatar
 
Sweet

Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: in the present moment
Posts: 60,023

Adopt-a-Bronco:
Ware
Default

Ya Let's keep lowering the bar because it's easier that way.
baja is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-18-2014, 02:58 PM   #842
DenverBrit
Just hanging out.
 
DenverBrit's Avatar
 
Got a breath mint??

Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Denver
Posts: 12,492

Adopt-a-Bronco:
The Team
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by broncocalijohn View Post
So I guess we can go with that and also add that peacepipe can easily take out his smear of "repugs" and replace with "Democraps" or whatever cute name Republicans can come up with. After all, this seems to be something Obama had done on those same Sunday shows.....

From linked National Review article

"Krauthammer’s right that what we have here was obvious all along: On the totality of the evidence, the White House took the intelligence community and diplomatic community’s estimate, which was relatively uncertain, bereft of much detail, and turned out days later to be quite wrong, and played up certain parts of it to avoid questions about their counterterror strategy and the situation in Libya. That isn’t being as straightforward with the American public as they could or probably should have been; it’s also not a lie or a cover-up. Whether what we have adds up to the “serious offense” Krauthammer calls it is a subjective judgment — what’s not subjective is the facts we have."
We have had seven panels look at Benghazi, and nothing new has come to light since.

An eight panel is just more politics and has nothing to do with 'getting to the bottom,' we are already there and there's nothing of note to see.

Last edited by DenverBrit; 05-18-2014 at 03:04 PM..
DenverBrit is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-18-2014, 03:03 PM   #843
DenverBrit
Just hanging out.
 
DenverBrit's Avatar
 
Got a breath mint??

Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Denver
Posts: 12,492

Adopt-a-Bronco:
The Team
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by peacepipe View Post
At the end of the day it remains the same. Talking points! Could the White House or whoever done better? Yes. Is it worth 2 yrs of political smearing,20 million in tax payer money wasted on this kangaroo court? No.
It was indecisive waffling by the WH that has been translated by the right as 'a smoking gun.'

I doubt any of those involved in constantly harping on Benghazi really believe there's anything, other than scoring partisan points, to be gained from yet another panel.
DenverBrit is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-18-2014, 08:27 PM   #844
BroncoBeavis
Ring of Famer
 
BroncoBeavis's Avatar
 
New to the Forum

Join Date: Sep 2013
Posts: 3,437

Adopt-a-Bronco:
None
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by The Lone Bolt View Post
The political left were quick to accuse bush of "lying." You righties are equally quick to call Obama a "liar" over Benghazi. Neither side is justified in those accusations IMO.
Brit, you wanna field this one?
BroncoBeavis is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-18-2014, 09:04 PM   #845
DenverBrit
Just hanging out.
 
DenverBrit's Avatar
 
Got a breath mint??

Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Denver
Posts: 12,492

Adopt-a-Bronco:
The Team
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by BroncoBeavis View Post
Brit, you wanna field this one?
Too tough for ya?
DenverBrit is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-19-2014, 10:18 AM   #846
Rigs11
Ring of Famer
 
Rigs11's Avatar
 

Join Date: Dec 2002
Posts: 8,598
Default

Rigs11 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-19-2014, 10:22 AM   #847
BroncoBeavis
Ring of Famer
 
BroncoBeavis's Avatar
 
New to the Forum

Join Date: Sep 2013
Posts: 3,437

Adopt-a-Bronco:
None
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by DenverBrit View Post
Too tough for ya?
You were one of the Impeach Bush'ers, were you not?
BroncoBeavis is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-19-2014, 11:01 AM   #848
DenverBrit
Just hanging out.
 
DenverBrit's Avatar
 
Got a breath mint??

Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Denver
Posts: 12,492

Adopt-a-Bronco:
The Team
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by BroncoBeavis View Post
You were one of the Impeach Bush'ers, were you not?
If there were enough evidence to justify impeachment, yes. Enough deaths and cost to the country meant it was worth investigating.

Oops, no WMDs, doesn't work for me and there was enough 'chatter' about shaping intelligence to fit an agenda. Curveball comes to mind.

But as congress didn't spend years trying to uncover anything of note, as in Benghazi, that ship sailed.

How about you, free pass for Bush, or should there have been an extensive investigation ala Ken Starr??
DenverBrit is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-19-2014, 11:12 AM   #849
Johnykbr
Perennial Pro-bowler
 
Johnykbr's Avatar
 
2.0: Now with three speeds!

Join Date: Sep 2013
Location: Raleigh, NC
Posts: 755

Adopt-a-Bronco:
BVP
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rigs11 View Post
That's BS. They didn't start planning 9/11 only the second that Clinton left the Whitehouse and Bush walked in. The fact is that it was a failure of bureaucracy and that's it.
Johnykbr is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-19-2014, 11:37 AM   #850
Rigs11
Ring of Famer
 
Rigs11's Avatar
 

Join Date: Dec 2002
Posts: 8,598
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Johnykbr View Post
That's BS. They didn't start planning 9/11 only the second that Clinton left the Whitehouse and Bush walked in. The fact is that it was a failure of bureaucracy and that's it.
they were warned by the Clinton admin, dubya's admin failed to act.
Rigs11 is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes



Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 08:25 AM.


Denver Broncos