Eleanor Clift Ludicrous Comments on Benghazi Terror Attacks … “Ambassador Stevens Wasn’t Murdered, He Died Of Smoke Inhalation”
Some Liberal moonbats will go to no ends to protect Hillary Clinton from her actions, or lack there of in Benghazi, including making an ass of them self.
Eleanor Clift has said some pretty ignorant things over the years, but this one might just take the cake. Not so much for her partisan, liberal, progressive partisan Democrat view point, but for the fact that she would continue to propagate a lie, a cover-up and a tape at the expense of a deceased US Ambassador. Eleanor Clift actually said on The McLaughlin Report, “I would like to point out that Ambassador Stevens was not ‘murdered, he died of smoke inhalation in a safe room in that CIA installation.”. SICK, SICK, SICK!!!
WOW … can we just say, LIAR!!! It is safe to say that no one can ever take this fool seriously anymore. She has been a liberal apologist for years, but this is beyond the pale and crazy talk. Of course her main liberal agenda was to protect Hillary Clinton, the presumptive 2016 Democrat presidential nominee. Clift ended her nonsensical ramblings by saying, “and its still a CIA and if you are going to put people on trial we should put David Petraeus on trail, not Hillary Clinton.”
Clift went on to continue to blame the video tape, which has all but been debunked at this point. Way to be kept in the informational loop Elenore. It is time to put Elenore out to politic pundit pasture. As Red State opines regarding the misguided Clift, “Next she’ll tell us that the 30o girls in Nigeria weren’t kidnapped by Islamic terrorists..they were actually just out on a school field trip, and are lost in the woods.”
Get used to this folks, defend, deflect, detract and lie to at all cost to protect Hillary Clinton from her record.
ELEANOR CLIFT: I would like to point out Ambassador Stevens was not murdered. He died of smoke inhalation in the safe room in that CIA installation.
SUSAN FERRECHIO: I don’t think that’s a fact, Eleanor.
CLIFT: I think that is a fact.
FERRECHIO: I’ve heard a drastically different story from people who are also in the know about that. So, I don’t think it is –
PAT BUCHANAN: It was a terrorist attack, Eleanor. He was murdered in a terrorist attack.
CLIFT: It was an opportunistic terrorist attack that grew out of that video.
BUCHANAN: The video had nothing to do with it.
CLIFT: There were demonstrations across the world.
Hillary Clinton Now Says Benghazi Is My Biggest Regret … But What Happened to What Difference Does it Make?
BUT WHAT DIFFERENCE DOES IT MAKE? IT WOULD APPEAR IT NOW MAKES A BIG DIFFERENCE FOR A HILLARY WHITE HOUSE RUN …
As Hillary Clinton eyes the 2016 Presidential election, she must first clean up the disasters in her political past and gloss over them hoping that the American people will some how forget. On Monday Clinton said in an interview that the “terrible tragedy” of the 2012 Benghazi attack that resulted in the death of four Americans was the “biggest regret” of her tenure at the Department of State. Regret, what exactly does she regret … completely ignoring the obvious like being told Benghazi was a terror threat?
Let the MSM slobbering love affair begin for the Hillary in 2016 campaign. What happened to the tape? What happened to this investigation? What happened to holding anyone accountable? But what difference does it make.
QUESTION: Any do-overs that you would — relative to Secretary of State?
HILLARY CLINTON: Oh, sure. I mean, you know, you make these choices based on imperfect information. And you make them to — as we say, the best of your ability. But that doesn’t mean that there’s not going to be unforeseen consequences, unpredictable twists and turns.
You know, my biggest, you know, regret is what happened in Benghazi. It was a terrible tragedy, losing four Americans, two diplomats and now it’s public, so I can say two CIA operatives, losing an ambassador like Chris Stevens, who was one of our very best and had served in Libya and across the Middle East and spoke Arabic.
Sorry, there should be a lot more than regrets:
- House of Rep Report: President Barack Obama, Hillary Clinton and State Department Blew the Benghazi Consulate Response
- Sen. Rand Paul (KY-R) To Hillary Clinton at Senate Foreign Relations Committee Hearing on Benghazi Terrorist Attack: ‘I Would Have Relieved You Of Your Post’
What Hillary Clinton really regrets is losing her cool in the Benghazi hearing and being caught on VIDEO say, what difference does it make, when it came to the deaths of four Americans. Because in the end, its all about Hillary and her run for 2016.
- Doctor who helped the CIA pinpoint Bin Laden is now facing additional charges in an attempt to keep him behind bars
Daily Commentary – Wednesday, November 27, 2013 Download
WOW … Attorney Joe DiGenova for Whistleblower Says … 400 Missiles Stolen in Benghazi & “In Hands of Some Very Ugly People”
BENGHAZI-GATE: It’s all beginning to make sense why Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton wanted Benghazi to go away …
During an interview Monday with WMAL’s Mornings On The Mall, Benghazi whistleblower attorney Joe DiGenova, who represents Mark Thompson, told WMAL he’s been told that some “very ugly people” had stolen the missiles, and that the Benghazi annex played a key role in the theft. The below is a must listen audio from Joe DiGenova that connects the dots as to why the Obama Administration and Hillary Clinton’s State department did what they did following the terror attack in Benghazi that left four Americans dead. It was never really about the Consulate for the terrorists, it was about the CIA annex. Ever wonder why the there was a delay of the FBI going to Benghazi to investigate the terrorist crime scene? Think the CIA wanted the FBI looking around and finding shoulder surface to air missiles right before a presidential election? What happens when these weapons are used against American targets? Weasel Zippers opines, DiGenova “also notes that the President mentioned the sealed indictment to make it appear as though he was doing something, but violated a court order to reveal the sealed indictment.” I thought Obama was going to go after “leakers”? Except, when it is him.
Make no mistake about it America, Benghazi-gate is far worse than Watergate ever was. 4 AMERICANS DIED!!! But we have an obstruction administration and a complicit liberal MSM covering for their hero, Barack Obama.
On August 12, Joe DiGenova, attorney for one of the Benghazi whistleblowers, told Washington D.C.’s WMAL that one of the reasons people have remained tight-lipped about Benghazi is because 400 U.S. missiles were “diverted to Libya” and ended up being stolen and falling into “the hands of some very ugly people.”
DiGenova represents Benghazi whistleblower Mark Thompson. He told WMAL that he “does not know whether [the missiles] were at the annex, but it is clear the annex was somehow involved in the distribution of those missiles.”
He claimed his information “comes from a former intelligence official who stayed in constant contact with people in the special ops and intelligence community.” He said the biggest concern right now is finding those missiles before they can be put to use. “They are worried, specifically according to these sources, about an attempt to shoot down an airliner,” he claimed.
Gee Hillary Clinton, are you still asking “what difference does it make?”
Benghazi-gate: CNN Reports Dozens of CIA Operatives Were on the Ground During Benghazi Attack … Unprecedented Attempt to keep CIA Benghazi Secrets From Leaking Out.
PHONY SCANDAL, EH?
Jake Tapper of CNN is reporting that dozens of CIA operative were on the ground during the terror attacks in Benghazi, Libya that resulted in the deaths of four Americans, including Ambassador Chris Stevens. Also, the CIA has gown to great lengths to cover up what happened and keep these individuals quite from talking to the media and testifying in front of Congress. Those agents that were on the ground in Benghazi have been subjected to frequent, even monthly polygraph examinations. More so than what is normally done. So if it is a phony scandal, why such an effort to hide these people from the media and Congress and even go so far as to change their names? Many have said from the outset of this terror attack that the target all along was the CIA annex, not the consulate. Remember, a long time ago we knew there were CIA operatives in Benghazi, we just never knew how many and what they were doing there?
Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton have done everything to prevent the real news from coming out. If this story is true, the fact that Obama and Clinton knowing put forth the ridiculous talking points and cover story of blaming the terror attacks on a video is even more insidious and makes them both derelict in their duty and unfit for any office.
CNN has uncovered exclusive new information about what is allegedly happening at the CIA, in the wake of the deadly Benghazi terror attack.
Four Americans, including Ambassador Christopher Stevens, were killed in the assault by armed militants last September 11 in eastern Libya.
Sources now tell CNN dozens of people working for the CIA were on the ground that night, and that the agency is going to great lengths to make sure whatever it was doing, remains a secret.
CNN has learned the CIA is involved in what one source calls an unprecedented attempt to keep the spy agency’s Benghazi secrets from ever leaking out.
Since January, some CIA operatives involved in the agency’s missions in Libya, have been subjected to frequent, even monthly polygraph examinations, according to a source with deep inside knowledge of the agency’s workings.
Hmm, does Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton might have a little Iran-Contra scandal on their hands here. Or were they doing a Syrian ‘Fast & Furious’ slow walking surface-to-air missiles? Because it worked so well on the Mexican border. In any event, it certainly would explain why President Barack Obama, former Sec. of State Hillary Clinton and the CIA have gone so far out of their way to cover this up and obstruct the truth from coming out.
Lawmakers also want to about know the weapons in Libya, and what happened to them.
Speculation on Capitol Hill has included the possibility the U.S. agencies operating in Benghazi were secretly helping to move surface-to-air missiles out of Libya, through Turkey, and into the hands of Syrian rebels.
It is clear that two U.S. agencies were operating in Benghazi, one was the State Department, and the other was the CIA.
Much more on this phony scandal at Michelle Malkin.
The sick and reprehensible part of the terror attacks in Benghazi is still to this day the Obama administration has held not one individual accountable for the deaths of four Americans and now refers to it as a phony scandal. Remember, Obama referred to them as also just mere “bumps in the road”.
UPDATE I: More from the Gateway Pundit with the VIDEO from ‘On the Record’ with Greta Van Sustern’s interview with Rep Tray Gowdy (R-SC). Trey Gowdy stated that the Obama Administration is hiding the survivors, dispersing them around the country, and changing their names.
“Including changing names, creating aliases. Stop and think what things are most calculated to get at the truth? Talk to people with first-hand knowledge. What creates the appearance and perhaps the reality of a cover-up? Not letting us talk with people who have the most amount of information, dispersing them around the country and changing their names.”
Posted August 2, 2013 by Scared Monkeys
Barack Obama, Benghazi-Gate, Chicago-Style Politics, CIA, CNN, collusion, Corruption, Cover-Up, Deceased, Epic Fail, Hillary Clinton, Libya, Obamanation, Phony Scandals, Scandal, State Department, The Dodger in Chief, The Lying King, Transparency, You Tube - VIDEO | 11 comments
Russian Federal Security Service (FSB) Announced It Has Arrested a CIA Spy Identified as Ryan Christopher Fogle in Moscow
RUT-ROH … Russia’s security services, the Federal Security Service (FSB) has arrested what they are saying is a CIA agent posing as an employee of the U.S. Embassy in Moscow. The man has been identified as Ryan Christopher Fogle. He was arrested on suspicion of spying. The FSB said Fogle had been masquerading as a career diplomat at the Political Section of the U.S. Embassy, but that he was a CIA employee. Hmm, how’s that Obama – Russia reset button going? Much, much more at RT, Russia Today. Let’s see how the Obama administration handles this one.
Ryan Christopher Fogle inside FSB office
Russia’s security services claimed Tuesday to have arrested a CIA agent posing as an employee of the U.S. Embassy in Moscow for allegedly trying to recruit a Russian secret service agent to work for the U.S.
The Federal Security Service (FSB) announced that it had detained a man identified as Ryan Christopher Fogle on the evening of May 13 or early the next morning for attempting to recruit a Russian agent.
The U.S. Embassy would not comment on the reports when contacted Tuesday morning by CBS News.
Russian news agency RIA Novosti quoted a statement from the FSB as saying Fogle was arrested while trying to recruit a member of the Russian security services, and he had on his person, “special technical devices, written instructions for the Russian citizen being recruited, a large sum of cash and means of changing his appearance.”
After being arrested and processed by Russian security services, the man was handed back to the U.S. diplomatic mission in Moscow.
Russia – Beyond the Headlines: FSB arrests CIA agent in Moscow.
Technical devices, a large amount of cash in Euros and disguises were also confiscated during the arrest.
Fogle also possessed a letter that offered the Russian officer up to $1 million per year in compensation and asked him to set up a new Gmail account to accept the offer.
U.S. Ambassador to Russia Michael McFaul said via Twitter that the embassy had no comment at this time. The embassy’s press service also confirmed that the U.S. mission in Moscow would not comment on the situation
It all depends on what is, is … Welcome to Obama’s ‘Watergate’, only this time Americans died.
The Obama White House has denied editing the talking points regarding the terror attack in Benghazi, Libya that killed four Americans including Ambassador Stevens. However, this contradicts former CIA director David Petraeus’ remarks that he had made behind closed doors to a Congressional committee. Petraeus told lawmakers that from the onset of the investigation about the September 11 attack, US intelligence pointed to al Qaeda affiliates. So who made the edits, who insisted the edits be made and who signed off on them? The edits would have been made after the statements had left the CIA for review by the Defense and State departments, ultimately landing at the White House. Sorry, but there has to be a simple paper trial of how this document changed and who changed and approved the changes. Barack Obama promised transparency and it is about time he is held accountable for such.
Obama continues to laugh at “We the People” as he played politics with the death of four brave souls as America was too busy taxing the rich
The White House yesterday denied it edited talking points about the terrorist attack that killed the American ambassador to Libya — contradicting remarks made a day earlier by disgraced ex-CIA chief David Petraeus.
“The only edit that was made by the White House and also by the State Department was to change the word ‘consulate’ to the word ‘diplomatic facility,’ since the facility in Benghazi was not formally a consulate,” Deputy National Security Adviser Ben Rhodes told reporters aboard Air Force One.
“Other than that, we were guided by the points that were provided by the intelligence community. So I can’t speak to any other edits that may have been made.”
One would think that a President, a Commander in Chief would be furious and demand answers to who edited talking points that put out a false narrative when four Americans died. However, not when it was made political and had to be covered up until after an election. In Obama’s world, the ends justify the means.
Who are you going to believe America? Think Obama’s WH did not edit the talking points or have a hand in taking the “terror” out? This from the same Obama Administration that changed the “WAR ON TERROR” to read as an “OVERSEAS CONTINGENCY OPERATION”.
Posted November 19, 2012 by Scared Monkeys
al-Qaeda, Assassination, Barack Obama, Benghazi-Gate, CIA, collusion, Conspiracy, Corruption, cronyism, David Petraeus, Ethics, Libya, Lost in Smallness, Misrepresentation, Obamanation, Radical Islam, Scandal, The Dodger in Chief, The Lying King, Transparency, War on Terror, WTF | 6 comments
Former CIA Director David Petraeus Heads to Capital Hill, Petraeus To Testify He Knew Libya Was Terrorism ‘Almost Immediately’
BENGHAZI-GATE COULD ESCALATE TODAY WITH PETRAEUS TESTIMONY.
After much speculation as to whether former CIA director Gen. David Petraeus would testify this week in front of lawmakers regarding the attack in Benghazi, Libya that resulted in the death of four Americans. It turns out that Petraeus will and is presently testifying this morning under oath. The question is, what will Petraeus say? Petraeus is presently testifying behind closed doors. Oh to be a fly on the wall.
Petraeus is under investigation by the agency for possible wrongdoing, though that’s not the subject of the closed-door hearings he is set to attend Friday. The September attack in Benghazi, which killed the U.S. ambassador and three other Americans, created a political firestorm, with Republicans claiming that the White House misled the public on what led to the violence.
As reported at Breitbart.com, they are reporting that David Petraeus will testify that he knew the attacks in Benghazi were a result of terrorism immediately. This certainly would contradict the Obama administration narrative and the faux talking points that UN Ambassador Rice spewed on five Sunday talk shows. This Petraeus testimony would be much different from what he initially said. Also being reported,Petraeus told this source he believed the CIA talking points given to Susan Rice came from within the White House or Administration. The Gateway Pundit reminds us that maybe it was the third email sent to the White House on the evening of 9-11 on the Benghazi attack that blamed an Al-Qaeda-linked group for the attack on the consulate that was the obvious signal.
Just a few minutes ago on CNN, Pentagon correspondent Barbara Starr reported that a high-placed source informed her that former CIA Chief David Petraeus will use his upcoming testimony to amend his previous testimony. According to this source, Petraeus will tell the closed door congressional hearing that he knew “almost immediately” that the September 11 anniversary attack on our Libyan consulate was a terrorist attack committed by the al-Qaeda-linked militia Ansar Al Sharia.
Brian in a Blue State
Charles Krauthammer: Petraeus Thought He Could Keep His Job … White House ‘Held Affair Over Petraeus’s Head’ For Favorable Testimony On Benghazi
QUID PRO QUO? So why does a sex scandal make it impossible for a CIA director like General David Petraeus to keep his job? Being black mailed and pressured to do and say things that are not true of course. But what happens when the blackmail and pressure comes from within, like the White House?
Charles Krauthammer has once again got it 100% correct. Appearing on Fox News’s Special Report, Krauthammer stated that the Obama White House used David Petraeus’s affair to get the CIA director to give favorable testimony about the attacks on the U.S. consulate in Benghazi, Libya. Petraeus thought he could keep his job after he knew he was being investigated for his “extramarital affair” and most likely went before the Congressional hearing and told a story to save his job by siding with the Obama administration ridiculous story that the attack was the result of a video tape. David Petraeus, of all people, who is an expert on terrorism knew better. But when some one has your professional career in their hands … he followed the Obama party line.
“His job, his reputation, his legacy, his whole celebrated life was in the hands of the administration, and he expected they would protect him by keeping it quiet.”
Transcript from News Busters:
CHARLES KRAUTHAMMER: I think the really shocking news today was that General Petraeus thought and hoped he could keep his job. He thought that it might and it would be kept secret, and that he could stay in his position. I think what that tells us is really important. It meant that he understood that the FBI obviously knew what was going on. He was hoping that those administration officials would not disclose what had happened, and therefore hoping that he would keep his job. And that meant that he understood that his job, his reputation, his legacy, his whole celebrated life was in the hands of the administration, and he expected they would protect him by keeping it quiet.
And that brings us to the ultimate issue, and that is his testimony on September 13. That’s the thing that connects the two scandals, and that’s the only thing that makes the sex scandal relevant. Otherwise it would be an exercise in sensationalism and voyeurism and nothing else. The reason it’s important is here’s a man who knows the administration holds his fate in its hands, and he gives testimony completely at variance with what the Secretary of Defense had said the day before, at variance with what he’d heard from his station chief in Tripoli, and with everything that we had heard. Was he influenced by the fact that he knew his fate was held by people within the administration at that time?
KRAUTHAMMER: Of course it was being held over Petraeus’s head, and the sword was lowered on Election Day. You don’t have to be a cynic to see that as the ultimate in cynicism. As long as they needed him to give the administration line to quote Bill, everybody was silent. And as soon as the election’s over, as soon as he can be dispensed with, the sword drops and he’s destroyed. I mean, can you imagine what it’s like to be on that pressure and to think it didn’t distort or at least in some way unconsciously influence his testimony? That’s hard to believe.
Doug Ross has the timeline and one pretty much has to have no brain to think that Obama, the WH and his reelection folks did not know about the Petraeus investigation.
Does anyone really think that the Obama White House did not know about the investigation that not only looks into CIA director Gen. Petraeus, but also Gen. Allen,the Commander of the US and NATO troops in Afghanistan. Come on folks, really? Remember the Obama philosophy on never letting a crisis go to waste.
Posted November 14, 2012 by Scared Monkeys
2012 Elections, Barack Obama, Benghazi-Gate, CIA, collusion, Conspiracy, Corruption, David Petraeus, Libyan Consulate - Amb. Stevens, Misrepresentation, Obamanation, Petraeus-gate, Quid Pro Quo, Scandal, Sex Scandal, The Dodger in Chief, The Lying King, Transparency, You Tube - VIDEO | 8 comments
The Petraeus Scandal Gets Worse … Marine Gen. John Allen, the Commander of the War in Afghanistan, Exchanged Thousands of “Potentially Inappropriate” Emails with Jill Kelley
Just when you thought the sex scandal of former CIA Director General David Petraeus could not get any worse, it does …
As reported at The Politico, Marine Gen. John R. Allen, the US. commander of the war in Afghanistan has been caught up and snagged in the Petraeus affair investigation. It appears that Allen was up to some hanky-panky of his own. It is being reported that Allen exchanged thousands of “potentially inappropriate” emails with Jill Kelley. Yes, the same Jill Kelly who contacted that FBI that she was receiving threatening emails from Petraeus’ mistress.
Marine Gen. John R. Allen, the four-star U.S. commander of the war in Afghanistan, exchanged thousands of “potentially inappropriate” emails with Jill Kelley, the Tampa woman who claimed to have been harassed by the ex-mistress of former CIA Director David Petraeus, a senior defense official told POLITICO early Tuesday. Allen, 58 and married, was nominated in October by President Barack Obama to be Supreme Allied Commander Europe and commander of the U.S. European Command. That nomination is now on hold, but Allen will remain commander of U.S. forces and the NATO International Security Assistance Force in Afghanistan, the official said.
The FBI notified the Defense Department on Sunday of “potentially inappropriate communications” between Allen and Kelley, and turned over to Pentagon lawyers 20,000 to 30,000 pages of emails exchanged by the two from 2010 to 2012.
My question is as follows, I run a web site and do not have the time to exchange thousands of emails, how does a commander in charge of a war have the time to do so? Also, with all the American military heroes killed by so-called friendly Afghans, could Allen maybe have concentrated on that rather than ”inappropriate emails”?