ABC’s Jon Karl Hammers WH Spokesman Jay Carney On Revisionist Benghazi Talking Points, Susan Rice Interviews & Smoking Gun Email Linked to Obama White House
Baghdad Bob Jay Carney grilled by ABC’s Jon Karl over new explosive emails linking the Obama White House over Benghazi untruthful talking points. Watch Jay twist, turn and spin … What does the Obama administration do when caught in a lie … Lie some more.
In the wake of Judicial Watch gaining a “smoking” email via FOIA lawsuit, the Obama administration is trying to explain away the obvious … they put politics over the death of four Americans, including a US Ambassador, in an attempt to distract from the truth during an election. ABC’s Jon Karl was relentless with WH spin-man Carney and just grilling him on the faux Benghazi talking points. Karl asked Carney why the Rhodes email is only now being made public? Carney actually said that the document (email) was not about Benghazi. Will the MSM finally do their job and go after the Obama administration?
Yup, not a smidgin of coverup in Benghazi whatsoever. What is being overlooked though, as Carney and Karl argue over whether the talking point email had to specifically do with Benghazi, which it did, Hugh Hewitt makes an important point in that every one of the Rhodes email goals, Not “The Truth” Every One Of Four Goals Urges A Lie.
More from Powerline on the absolutely ridiculous answer given by Jay Carney to the White House reporters regarding the email and that it was not about Benghazi.
Carney’s answer is ridiculous. Of course the email bears more broadly on conditions across the Middle East, but it relates most specifically to Benghazi. Why was Susan Rice appearing on every Sunday morning talk show? Because four Americans were killed in Benghazi. Why was the administration’s top political team gathering to prepare her for those appearances? Because four Americans were killed in Benghazi. Why does the email begin with the stated goal of conveying that the Obama administration is doing everything it can to protect its people abroad? Because four Americans were killed in Benghazi. Why is the group talking about “bringing people who harm Americans to justice”? The only place where Americans were harmed was Benghazi. Obviously, the email relates to Benghazi. And equally obviously, its reference to “underscor[ing] that these protests are rooted in an internet video, and not a broader failure of policy” was intended to deflect blame for the deaths of four Americans in Benghazi.
The Smoking Email: Benghazi Email Documents Point to White House on Misleading Talking Points … White House Deputy Strategic Communications Adviser Ben Rhodes
THE SMOKING BENGHAZI-GATE EMAIL … THEY ARE WHO WE THOUGHT THEY WERE … OBAMA PLAYING POLITICS WITH AMERICANS DYING.
Yup, not a smidgen of deceit, corruption and cover up …
As reported at the Washington Free Beacon, previously unreleased internal Obama administration emails show that there was a coordinated effort made in the days following the Benghazi consulate terror attacks that left four Americans dead, including Ambassador Chris Stevens, to portray the incident as “rooted in [an] Internet video, and not [in] a broader failure or policy.” The documents were gained by Judicial Watch, as result of a June 21, 2013, Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit filed against the Department of State. The documents show explicitly that emails sent by senior White House adviser Ben Rhodes to other top administration officials reveal an effort to insulate President Barack Obama from the attacks that killed four Americans. WH adviser Rhodes also sent this email to top White House officials like David Plouffe and Jay Carney just a day before National Security Adviser Susan Rice made her infamous Sunday news show appearances to discuss the attack. Rice would then go on all five Sunday talk shows and lie to America and blame a video regarding what happened in Benghazi to protect Obama politically.
AMERICANS DIED AND OBAMA LIED … How much more proof do you need America to show that the Obama administration purposely and willfully orchestrated the Benghazi attack lies in order to distract the American public from Obama’s foreign policy failures ahead of an election? Usually the cover up is worse than the crime, but in this case four Americans died.
Judicial Watch announced today that on April 18, 2014, it obtained 41 new Benghazi-related State Department documents. They include a newly declassified email showing then-White House Deputy Strategic Communications Adviser Ben Rhodes and other Obama administration public relations officials attempting to orchestrate a campaign to “reinforce” President Obama and to portray the Benghazi consulate terrorist attack as being “rooted in an Internet video, and not a failure of policy.” Other documents show that State Department officials initially described the incident as an “attack” and a possible kidnap attempt.
The Rhodes email was sent on sent on Friday, September 14, 2012, at 8:09 p.m. with the subject line: “RE: PREP CALL with Susan, Saturday at 4:00 pm ET.” The documents show that the “prep” was for Amb. Rice’s Sunday news show appearances to discuss the Benghazi attack.
The document lists as a “Goal”: “To underscore that these protests are rooted in and Internet video, and not a broader failure or policy.”
Rhodes returns to the “Internet video” scenario later in the email, the first point in a section labeled “Top-lines”:
[W]e’ve made our views on this video crystal clear. The United States government had nothing to do with it. We reject its message and its contents. We find it disgusting and reprehensible. But there is absolutely no justification at all for responding to this movie with violence. And we are working to make sure that people around the globe hear that message.
More from The National Review Online:
He wrote that the president and administration “find [the video] disgusting and reprehensible,” but said that “there is absolutely no justification at all for responding to this move with violence.”
Additionally, Rhodes recommended Rice herald President Obama ahead of the upcoming elections.
“I think that people have come to trust that President Obama provides leadership that is steady and statesmanlike,” Rhodes wrote. “There are always going to be challenges that emerge around the world, and time and again, he has shown that we can meet them.”
“Benghazi Emails Show White House Effort to Protect Obama — Staff attempted to insulate president’s policies from criticism ahead of election.” It’s everything that we knew!It’s everything we suspected about Benghazi. And remember, we still don’t know where Obama was for five to seven hours. The president of the United States was off the grid. At five o’clock, in the middle of the attack, the last he says to Hillary and Panetta or whoever it was (paraphrasing), “You guys handle it, take care of it,” and he’s gone. So goes the story.
And now we’ve got these e-mails saying that the White House staff redid the talking points. They massaged everything in order to protect Obama, plausible deniability, to make it appear, running of the election, Obama had no clue what was going on. It was not his policy, this or that. He was not involved. Whatever it took, the White House did. That’s the latest from this release from Benghazi. And, yeah, it’s too late for 2012, but it’s not too late for November this year, folks.
FLASHBACK TO FEB 24, 2014 Interview on Meet the Press … Susan Rice Says She Has No Regrets Over Initial Benghazi Interviews, ‘Patently False’ That I Misled American People.
Imagine being on a job interview and asked about your accomplishments to be considered for the job and you got nothing …
Thus was the case for Hillary Clinton when Thomas Friedman asked her what do you see as your biggest accomplishment on the job as stated by Salon political writer Steve Kornacki to the MSNBC Hardball audience. Hoe is it possible that even Hillary Clinton herself was “flummoxed” when asked about her accomplishments?
“So Joan, you know, this isn’t just a case of State Department spokesperson being caught off guard one day. This is something that sounds like Hillary herself has not fully come up with a way to articulate. Republicans clearly think this is something they can hit her with in 2016.”
Hmm, how’s it going in Syria, Libya, North Korea, Iran or Russia? Maybe Hillary should have said the Russian reset button, the powder keg that now is the Middle East or Benghazi … but I guess what difference does it make.
Hillary Clinton “Flummoxed” When Questioned About Accomplishments
State Department spokeswoman can’t name Hillary Clinton’s diplomatic achievements … and neither can Hillary Clinton!
State Department Press Secretary Jen Psaki was flummoxed, too, when asked about a 2010 State Department Quadrennial Diplomacy and Development Review (QDDR) that summarized then-Secretary Clinton’s goals and accomplishments.
‘Can you, off the top of your head, identify one tangible achievement that … resulted from the last QDDR?’ asked an Associated Press reporter during the daily briefing.
‘I am certain that those who were here at the time, who worked hard on that effort, could point out one,’ Psaki replied through a forced smile.
‘I’m sure there are a range of things that were put into place that I’m not even aware of,’ she offered moments later.
‘I won’t hold my breath,’ the reporter shot back
They Have No Shame … Susan Rice Says She Has No Regrets Over Initial Benghazi Interviews, ‘Patently False’ That I Misled American People (VIDEO)
Doubling Down … Softball interview with NBC’s ‘Meet the Press’ … National Security Adviser Susan Rice says she has no regrets on Benghazi interview following the death of four Americans.
Oh what tangled webs we weave when we practice to deceive. The Obama administration is simply incapable of telling the truth. National Security Adviser Susan Rice, when asked this Sunday on ‘Meet the Press,’ said that she had no regrets with what she said on five Sunday network talk shows in misleading the America public is saying the Benghazi attack was based on a video tape rather than a terror attack. Rice claims that it is “settled science” that the Obama administration had done nothing wrong. Rice stated some of the information turned out not to be correct, “but the notion that somehow I or anybody else in the administration misled the American people is patently false. And I think that that’s been amply demonstrated.” HA, this from the Obama administration that said, if you liked your insurance plan, you can keep your insurance plan, PERIOD! I am sensing a pattern.
No regrets, really? The reason why she is not Secretary of State Rice and is only the National Security Adviser is because of those lies. Of course an all too in the tank bias media was no where to be found as David Gregory asked no follow up questions to contradict her “Alinky” comments.
Yeah, not a smidgen of corruption whatsoever.
National Security Adviser Susan Rice said Sunday she has no regrets about her now-infamous round of TV interviews in 2012 about the the attacks on the U.S. mission in Benghazi, Libya.
Rice, appearing on NBC’s “Meet the Press,” said that nobody in the Obama administration intended to mislead the American people when she appeared on Fox, ABC, CNN, NBC and CBS in 2012 shortly after the attacks.
Asked by host David Gregory if she had any regrets about the interviews, Rice replied: “No.”
“Because what I said to you that morning, and what I did every day since, was to share the best information that we had at the time,” Rice said. “The information I provided, which I explained to you, was what we had at the moment. It could change. I commented that this was based on what we knew on that morning, was provided to me and my colleagues and, indeed, to Congress, by the intelligence community. And that’s been well validated in many different ways since.”
“That information turned out, in some respects, not to be 100 percent correct,” she acknowledged. “But the notion that somehow I or anybody else in the administration misled the American people is patently false. And I think that that’s been amply demonstrated.”
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.
National Security Advisor Susan Rice Does ’60 Minutes’ Interview and Calls Blaming Benghazi on the Mohammed Video a ‘False Controversy’ … What Difference Does it Make, Eh?
Susan Rice just did Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton no favors with her ’60 Minutes’ interview … “FALSE CONTROVERSY”!!!
National Security Adviser Susan Rice appeared on ’60 Minutes’ to do an interview with Leslie Stahl and I have no idea why. Rice did nothing but continue the stonewalling on Benghazi. She continued the Hillary Clinton talking points of “what difference does it make” when she said during last nights interview, “I don’t have time to think about a false controversy.” Doesn’t this pretty much sum up the Obama presidency … get caught in a scandal and instead of coming clean, double down and continue to deny it. Then there was that hard hitting piece of the interview where we found out Susan Rice was a mother. Really CBS, really? But then again it is not like ’60 Minutes’ has clean hands.
The American Spectator reminds us that ’60 Minutes’
mislead the public about the cover-up effort on Benghazi-gate and the effort by the Obama administration to blame the attack on anti-Muslim tapes.
Hmm, Susan Rice says Hillary Clinton didn’t do 5 Sunday morning talk shows because she was to busy lying to the families of those killed at the Benghazi consulate. Just the kind of person that we need president, isn’t it?
Susan Rice: I don’t have time to think about a false controversy. In the midst of all of the swirl about things like talking points, the administration’s been working very, very hard across the globe to review our security of our embassies and our facilities. That’s what we ought to be focused on.
Lesley Stahl: But the questions keep coming. When someone heard that I was going to be talking to you they said, “You have to ask her why Hillary Clinton didn’t do the interview that morning.” Did she, did she smell trouble?
Susan Rice: She had just gone through an incredibly painful and stressful week. Secretary Clinton, as our chief diplomat, had to reach out to the families, had to greet the bodies upon their arrival at Andrews Air Force Base. If I were her, the last thing I would have wanted to do is five Sunday morning talk shows. So I think it’s perfectly understandable–
Lesley Stahl: So when they asked you –
Susan Rice: So when the White House asked me, I agreed to do it.
Lesley Stahl: Do you ever think, “Gee, I wish I hadn’t done that.” You know, if you hadn’t done that, I’d be calling you Madam Secretary of State maybe.
Benghazi-gate will doom Hillary Clinton. She has much explaining to do and it does make a difference Hillary!!!
Posted December 23, 2013 by Scared Monkeys
al-Qaeda, Amb. Susan Rice, Barack Obama, Benghazi-Gate, CBS, Divider in Chief, Epic Fail, Gutter Politics, Hillary Clinton, Liars, Libya, Media Bias, Middle East, Misleader, Misrepresentation, Obamanation, Scandal, Terrorism, The Lying King, Transparency, War on Terror, You Tube - VIDEO | 3 comments
BREAKING: Reuters is reporting that a United States citizen working at the international school in Benghazi, Libya has been shot and killed. FOX News is reporting that medical and security sources told Reuters that the man was targeted by gunmen as he was exercising. No one has yet taken responsibility for the cowardly act.
Gunmen have killed a U.S. citizen working at an international school in the Libyan city of Benghazi, medical and security sources said on Thursday.
The attackers shot the American man, who was an instructor or teacher at the Benghazi school, while he exercised in the morning, the sources said.
After the murders of four Americans in Benghazi on September 11, 2012, including the death of US Ambassador Chris Stevens has literally gone unpunished by the Obama administration, terrorists in Benghazi must think it is open season on Americans. There has been no comment yet from the Obama administration as to whether an anti-Muslim tape was responsible for the shooting.
This is what happens when you do not respond to terrorist acts in kind. How have the deaths of Tyrone Woods, Sean Smith, Glen Doherty and Amb. Chris Stevens not been investigated and justice not been served?
Posted December 5, 2013 by Scared Monkeys
al-Qaeda, America - United States, Barack Obama, Benghazi-Gate, Deceased, Epic Fail, Good & Evil, Islam/Muslims, Jihad, Libya, Misleader, Murder, Muslim Brotherhood, Obamanation, Radical Islam, Taliban, Terrorism, The Dodger in Chief, United States, US National Security, Violence, War on Terror, WTF | no comments
Clash Between US Rep. Jeff Duncan (R-SC) Challenging John Kerry With Benghazi Questions During Syria Hearing and the Obama Administrations Credibility
Representative Duncan shreds Secretary of State John Kerry and the Obama Administration on credibility.
Rep. Jeff Duncan (R-SC) challenged Kerry and the Obama administration on military action in Syria when they have a lack of credibility doing anything with Benghazi, Fast & Furious and other White House scandals. Duncan said to Sec. Kerry, “America deserves answers before we send another man or woman the caliber of Ty Woods in harm’s way especially in another country’s civil war.” Obviously Duncan hit a nerve with Kerry as the Sec. of State became very defensive and thin skinned with his answers and response. Then Kerry said the unthinkable which made his predecessors, Hillary Clinton’s, comment, “What difference does it make” (VIDEO 5:14) pale in comparison … “We’re talking about people being killed by gas and you want to go talk about Benghazi and Fast and Furious!” Unbelievable. So are we to understand that the death of four Americans, including Ambassador Stevens, in Benghazi where no one has been brought to justice and US Border guard Brian Terry’s death are actually less important in the eyes of the Obama administration? We are still the United States of America, are we not?
“These issues call into question the accountability of this administration,” Duncan said. “Its commitment to the personnel on the ground, and the judgment that it uses when, making these determinations. The American people deserve answers before they move forward talking about military involvement in Syria.”
This is what happens when you have a president who cannot be trusted and who has scandals abound. There is no political capital to give him the benefit of the doubt. Obama has no credibility.
Rep. Jeff Duncan (R-S.C.) during the House Foreign Affairs Committee’s hearing on Syria Wednesday got into a tense back and forth with Secretary of State John Kerry after the congressman brought up last year’s deadly Benghazi terror attack to question the White House’s credibility on foreign affairs.
The administration has a serious credibility issue with the American people,” Duncan said, “due to unanswered questions surrounding the terrorist attack in Benghazi almost a year ago.”
He went on to mention some of the other major scandals that have plagued the Obama administration, including the Internal Revenue Service’s targeting of conservative groups and the Department of Justice’s monitoring of the Associated Press.
“Bottom line is there’s a need for accountability and trust-building from the administration,” he said. “The administration has a credibility issue.”
Sorry, but the Obama administration has no credibility. Some how they cannot bring to justice those that killed four Americans in Benghazi and pretty much refuse to investigate and get answers, let alone try to lie and defraud the American people as to what happened there. They have no credibility with Fast & Furious, AP-gate, IRS-gate, FOX/Rosen-gate, NSA-gate and the list goes on and on. This administration has a record of being less than honest with the American people. Why should they be given the benefit of the doubt now? Obama tried to rush us into a military action and a Syrian civil war with no Congressional approval until the Brits said no to PM Cameron. JUST SAY NO!
Posted September 5, 2013 by Scared Monkeys
Barack Obama, Benghazi-Gate, Community Agitator, Congress, Democrats, Divider in Chief, Double Standard, Epic Fail, Ethics, Fast & Furious, Government, House of Representatives, Imperial President, John Kerry, Liberals, Libya, Lost in Smallness, Misleader, Obamanation, Scandal, Syria, The Dodger in Chief, The Lying King, WTF, You Tube - VIDEO | 4 comments
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
Former Democrat Rep. Dennis Kucinich was Asked Whether Benghazi Talking Points were Politically Scrubbed … His Response, “Of Course They Were, Are You Kidding?”
BOMBSHELL COMMENTS FROM FORMER REP. DENNIS KUCINICH, D-OHIO AND HARD CORE LIBERAL …
Former Democrat US Representative Dennis Kucinich and now Fox News contributor appeared on Fox News Sunday this morning and his comments regarding Benghazi were damning for Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton. I must say that I had to check outside the window while I was 100% aggressing with Kucinich’s remarks as I thought I saw pigs flying by. When asked by Chris Wallace during the panel discussion, if he thought the Benghazi talking points were politically scrubbed, Kucinich replied, “OF COURSE THEY WERE. COME ON, ARE YOU KIDDING”? Kucinich had previously stated that the Obama administration had to call the Benghazi attack a street demonstration otherwise it brought into play on the eve of an election the fact that the entire Benghazi policy was a failure. Then there was the damning comment of the Obama administration and the Hillary Clinton run State Department … “So we went there to protect the Libyan people. We couldn’t go into Benghazi to protect our own Americans who were serving there?”
WALLACE: Congressman Kucinich, I think it’s fair to say you’re a liberal Democrat. But I want to ask you, does it bother you that the CIA, as we now know, originally wrote about links to Al Qaeda, originally wrote about having warned the State Department for months about threats in Benghazi and that all of that was taken out and let’s put this up on the screen. State Department official Victoria Nuland wrote in pushing back against what the CIA had written, that information “could be abused by members of Congress to beat up the State Department for not paying attention to warnings, so why would we want to feed that either? Concerned.” This, Congressman, from the transparent administration of Barack Obama.
FORMER REP. DENNIS KUCINICH, D-OHIO: Well, I didn’t need those memos to know that it was wrong for us to intervene in Libya. This is one liberal Democrat who said the intervention was wrong. And what the attack on the consulate brings up, Chris, is the failure of the Benghazi policy from the beginning. And that’s why they had to call it a street demonstration instead of an attack because on the eve of an election that brought in a whole new narrative about foreign policy, about dealing with terrorism, and about the consequences that led to four deaths of people who served the United States.
WALLACE: So do you think those talking points were politically scrubbed?
KUCINICH: Of course they were. Come on, are you kidding? You know, this is one of those things that you have to realize, we’re in the circumference of an election, and when you get on the eve of an election, everything becomes political. Unfortunately, Americans died and people who believe in America who put their lives on the line, they weren’t provided with protection. They weren’t provided with a response. They and their families had a right to make sure that they were defended. Look, we went into Benghazi with under the assumption that somehow there was going to be a massacre in Benghazi. So we went there to protect the Libyan people. We couldn’t go into Benghazi to protect our own Americans who were serving there? I’m offended by this, and there has to be real answers to the questions that are being raised.
WALLACE: Kim, let’s assume that Congressman Kucinich is right and that the talking points were politically scrubbed to protect Hillary Clinton, to protect Barack Obama running for re-election, is that where the scandal ends? What evidence is there — there certainly were misjudgments, but what evidence is there that the administration did anything wrong, wrong, either before or during the attack?
KIMBERLEY STRASSEL, THE WALL STREET JOURNAL: Well, the thing is we don’t know. And this is what we found out this week, that the official record that is out there on all kinds of things, is simply not correct. OK, so, you know, apparently the White House was not involved in the talking points. That’s not true. Apparently Hillary Clinton was just a footnote in all of this. That was not true. Apparently and supposedly their requests for aid were never denied. We’ve heard this week that that was not true. And so the White House faces an issue here, which is where do we go — where do we get these answers? And that’s why you are now hearing calls for a bipartisan select committee. The Democrats keep claiming that this is partisan, this is a partisan exercise. The only way you’re going to get these answers is if you actually put a committee, put both sides on it, give them the power of deposition, give them the power of subpoena, finally get the emails, finally talk to all the witnesses in public, and if the White House really claims it has nothing to hide, then it shouldn’t fear such an exercise. But that’s the only way that you’re going to start getting any answers on this. Otherwise it’s going to drip, drip, drip on like this week after week.