Daily Commentary – Monday, September 9, 2013 – Looks like Charlie Rose of CBS Nabs the Big Interview With Assad

• Assad claims in his interview with Rose that he was not behind the chemical attacks

Thomas Hicks, We Knew Benghazi was a Terrorist Attack “from the Get-Go” … Dem Rep. Lynch Admits that Benghazi Talking Points: ‘It Was Scrubbed … It Was False Information.”

BENGHAZI-GATE just got worse for President Barack Obama and future presidential wannabe Hillary Clinton.

The headline might as well be, CBS News reports … Bombshell tonight, ala Nancy Grace; however, in this case, it truly is a bombshell and the Obama Administration has much explanting to do. Bob Schieffer from CBS’s ‘Face the Nation’ started out by saying its the story that just won’t go away. For those Republicans in the House that think they have no political juice, here are words that I never thought I would ever hear from CBS News … “there is new information raising questions about whether there was a cover-up by the State Department to deflect criticism that it had ignored requests for more security for its people in Libya.”

That is much to the displeasure this morning in the Obama White House, with former Sec. of State Hillary Clinton and the among the MSM who have tried to bury what really happened at the  Benghzi consulate in Libya on September 11, 2012.  Just how bad is the government cover-up of Benghazi-gate when CBS News is forced to report the new information and use the “cover-up” word? As discussed at the PJ Tatler, Thomas Hicks, the former deputy chief of mission in Libya and the number-two diplomat in Libya at the time of the terrorist attack on our diplomatic mission reportedly told a congressional committee that they knew that it was a terrorist attack “from the get-go.”  This is a far different story that we were told directly after the terror attack that left four Americans dead, including Ambassador Christopher Stevens. Also, a much different story than put out by the Obama WH and that individuals have testified to in front of Congress.

“Everybody in the mission” in Benghazi, Libya, thought the attack on a U.S. consulate there last Sept. 11 was an act of terror “from the get-go,” according to excerpts of an interview investigators conducted with the No. 2 official in Libya at the time, obtained by CBS News’ “Face the Nation.”

“I think everybody in the mission thought it was a terrorist attack from the beginning,” Greg Hicks, a 22-year foreign service diplomat who was the highest-ranking U.S. official in Libya after the strike, told investigators under authority of the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee. Hicks, the former U.S. Embassy Tripoli deputy chief of mission, was not in Benghazi at the time of the attack, which killed Chris Stevens – then the U.S. ambassador to Libya – and three other Americans.

The House hearings on Benghazi this week with “whistle-blowers” Mark Thompson, Gregory Hicks and Eric Nordstrum just got a lot more interesting and promises to be must see TV,  http://Oversight.House.Gov at 11:30  here

Also this weekend on ‘FOX News Sunday’ with Chris Wallace, Democratic congressman Stephen Lynch said that Susan Rice used “scrubbed” talking points on Benghazi to deliver “false information” to the American people. Lynch went on to say that, “Absolutely, they were false, they were wrong,” after being asked about Steve Hayes’s report on “The Benghazi Talking Points.” Damning.  It is pathetic yet all too common for this Administration that the moment there was a tragedy, as stated at Michelle Malkin.com they looked for the political advantage rather than leadership and dealing with the issue at hand rather than leadership and dealing with four dead Americans. It was all about the “talking points” and how Obama could exploit this, not about the death’s of four brave Americans.

The Weekly Standard has the transcript of the key parts of the discussion:

Lynch: “They certainly weren’t accurate. I don’t know what the process was there. But, absolutely, they were false. They were wrong. There were no protests outside of the Benghazi compound there. This was a deliberate and strategic attack on the consulate there. So any statements that this was sort of like the other protests that we saw in Cairo and other embassies- this was not that type of case. This was a concerted effort. ”

Wallace “How do you explain the fact that that Sunday, UN Ambassador Rice came on this show and 4 other Sunday shows- never mentioned Al Qaeda extremists which had been scrubbed from the talking points- but did mention a reaction to the anti-Islam video which had never been in any of the talking points?”

Lynch: “Well it was scrubbed- it was totally inaccurate. You’re absolutely right. There was no excuse for that. It was false information. And what they tried to was harmonize what happened in Benghazi with what happened everywhere else across the Middle East. Which was totally wrong.”

Wallace: “And do you think part of that was- do you think it was scrubbed because of the fact that didn’t fit into President’s narrative that Al Qaeda was on the run?”

Lynch: “Well I, yeah, I think it was a victory of ‘hope over reality’- to be honest with you. They were hoping this wasn’t the case.”

As they say, the cover-up is always worse than the crime. However, in this case because four Americans died, both are equally as bad. It is obvious this cover up took place to play a four corners offense and delay the truth so that the reelection of Barack Obama could take place first, rather than “The One” having to deal with a “Watergate” prior to the 2012 election. And the MSM was all too willing to oblige.

I would say to White House Press Secretary Jay Carney, it looks like Benghazi just got a bit more recent.

A Slobbering Quid Pro Quo Love Affair … President Barack Obama Praises Hillary Clinton in “60 Minutes” Interview

SHAMEFUL, SIMPLY SHAMEFUL … This is just one big pukefest between Barack Obama, Hillary Clinton and the liberal MSM.

Remember when “60 Minutes” was considered investigative journalism? NOT ANY MORE. The liberal MSM does not hide their bias anymore and frankly, they just do not care who knows it. This Sunday, “60 Minutes” will have a lovefest, kumbaya, quid pro quo,  slobbering love affair between President Barack Obama, Hillary Clinton and the MSM. One might as well call it Hillary Clinton’s first endorsement and announce for her 2016 Presidential run. When asked by 60 Minutes host Steve Kroft as to why Obama wanted to do this, the president responded by saying, “Hillary Clinton will go down as one of the finest Secretary of States we’ve had.” The real question is why would “60 Minutes” want to waist their air time with such a puff piece? This isn’t “The View”, or is it? The “60 Minutes” interview is nothing more than an infomercial.

In this softball interview from the sellouts of “60 Minutes”, President Obama does nothing but heap praise on Hillary Clinton. Obama stated, “Hillary Clinton will go down as one of the finest Secretary of States we’ve had.” Huh, really? The present World and US foreign policy been in more chaos? The Middle East is a tinderbox on the verge of exploding, the Arab Spring has been nothing more than a Muslim Brotherhood and Al-Qaeda take over, the US relationship with Russia is a mystery and North Korea is as troublesome as it ever has been. The Obama and Clinton lie that al-Qaeda and terrorism is on the run has been just that, a lie.  

How does “60 Minutes” with both Obama and Clinton in one setting not grill them on the murders of four Americans in Benghazi and the subsequent lack of anyone being held accountable including those in the United States and the terrorists in Libya? With both of the so-called people in charge, how come the once proud investigative journalism program did not hold both their feet to the fire and demand questions for “We the People” as to why there was a video lie put forth in Benghazi, why were there no troops sent, why has no one been held accountable, why did the cries of help for more security go heard, and how could four Americans just be left to die without any help?

 60 Minutes, from Investigative Journalism to Democrat Propaganda

Obama may seem to think that Hillary is the best Secretary of State ever, Senator Rand Paul of Kentucky would have had her fired.

What a joke, you have the President of the United States, the Secretary of State and the presumed next prime candidate for the Democrat nominee for President and the MSM asks no real questions. From this point forward we can forget about any of the media ever holding a Democrat to accountability.

The whole point of the interview was a complicit, in the tank corrupt liberal  media allowing Obama to pay back Bill Clinton with Obama giving Hillary a ringing endorsement for 2016. The MSM was all too willing to oblige.

MSM Bias … CBS Tries to Defend Withholding Key Part Of Obama Interview Where He Wouldn’t Call Benghazi A Terror Attack (Assassination of Ambassador Stevens)

More MSM bias and how the Corrupt Media Complex is nothing more than the Obama propaganda outlet meant to deceive the American public.

As reported at the Politico, CBS has been caught with their hand in the defend Obama at all cost cookie jar as they try and defend not airing a key portion of their ’60 Minutes’ interview where Obama wouldn’t call the Benghazi terror attack and the assassination of Ambassador Stevens a terror attack. This is the kind of interview that any media outlet dreams of … one with the president and the most important news of the day with an issue like terrorism. A sure fire ratings grabbers. Not for CBS, who inexplicably withheld the President’s comments so to protect their candidate.

Benghazi, the ‘Watergate” of our times and no MSM to hold a president accountable

Pic Hat Tip: Vanderbilt ’12

CBS News is continuing to draw fire for withholding footage of a Sept. 12 interview with President Barack Obama in which he said it was “too early to tell” whether or not the previous day’s attack in Benghazi, Libya, had been an act of terror.

That remark, which was not included in the “60 Minutes” package that first aired on Sept. 23, was also left out of a subsequent package that aired in the days following the second presidential debate, when President Obama said that he had called the attack “an act of terror” in his Rose Garden address on Sept. 12, which took place before the interview. The remark was not released until yesterday, a fact Bret Baier of Fox News called attention to earlier today.

In interviews with POLITICO, former House Speaker Newt Gingrich said CBS had been “explicitly misleading” in order “to protect President Obama.” Former White House press secretary Ari Fleischer said he was “dumbstruck” by the network’s decision not to report on such a newsworthy item. On Fox News, Sen. John McCain said CBS was “not carrying out their responsibilities of informing the American people,” while conservative columnist Byron York wrote on Twitter that the network had “a scandal on their hands.”

Meanwhile, sources at rival television networks, who declined to speak on the record, expressed confusion over CBS’s decision.

“It’s surprising they held on to any of it,” one source said. “If [we had the interview], we would’ve put that stuff out the second it became news — again — after the debate. All of it.”

So what was the part of the interview that was cut from “We the People”? How about what might be the most key part of the interview in asking Obama whether the attack was a terrorist one or not? Shameful, simply shameful. But then again as Weasel Zippers sarcastically notes, it is not as though this was news worthy.

In the interview conducted on Sept. 12, Steve Kroft of “60 Minutes” asked the president about his remarks in the Rose Garden: “Mr. President, this morning you went out of your way to avoid the use of the word terrorism in connection with the Libya Attack, do you believe that this was a terrorism attack?,” Kroft asked.

“Well it’s too early to tell exactly how this came about, what group was involved, but obviously it was an attack on Americans,” Obama said.

Hmm, I thought that Obama claimed, echoed by CNN’s Candy Crowley as she came to Obama’s aid, that Obama had called it a terror attack in the Rose Garden as he falsely stated during the 2nd Presidential debate?

Barack Obama is only at 48% in the polls because of a lying, deceitful and corrupt bias media that would do anything to make sure he was reelected including withholding important information from We the People.

As stated at Legal Insurrection, some one at CBS will most certainly be fired for this. However, not for withholding the clip, but for publishing it at all. Sadly, this is probably more fact than fiction. Is it any wonder why the MSM has not pressed Barack Obama on Benghazi and the murder of four Americans. We can only imagine how the story would have been pursued if the president was a Republican.

There is no question that the American people deserved answers and to be told by their president what he knew and when he knew it. However, with a bias MSM, those things do not pertain to democrat presidents and especially this one who the media feels the need to protect and coddle at all cost.

Benghazi-Gate: Unbelievable, Key Terror Task Force, Counterterrorism Security Group (CSG), Not Convened During Benghazi Consulate Attack

BARACK OBAMA … EPIC FAILURE AS COMMANDER IN CHIEF.

Is this the email that Newt Gingrich mentioned the other night that news outlets were rumored to have and they are damning to Obama and his incompetence and dereliction of duty in handling Benghazi.

As reported at CBS News, counterterrorism sources and internal emails express frustration that key responders were ready to deploy, but were not called upon to help in the attack. The emails are said to have come from unidentified sources in the State department, the U.S. military and the Justice Department. Hmm, think these folks are tired of being thrown under the bus by Obama and his stonewalling of what really happened?

CBS News has learned that during the Sept. 11 attack on the U.S. Mission in Benghazi, the Obama Administration did not convene its top interagency counterterrorism resource: the Counterterrorism Security Group, (CSG).

“The CSG is the one group that’s supposed to know what resources every agency has. They know of multiple options and have the ability to coordinate counterterrorism assets across all the agencies,” a high-ranking government official told CBS News. “They were not allowed to do their job. They were not called upon.”

Information shared with CBS News from top counterterrorism sources in the government and military reveal keen frustration over the U.S. response on Sept. 11, the night Ambassador Chris Stevens and three other Americans were killed in a coordinated attack on the U.S. Consulate in Libya.

The question is, how could the Counterterrorism Security Group not be  convened after such an attack at Benghazi that the WH et all saw in real time? As Weasil Zippers says, I guess the terror experts were not convened because Obama had decimated al-Qaeda. Sure he did.

As to why the Counterterrorism Security Group was not convened, National Security Council Spokesman Tommy Vietor told CBS News “From the moment the President was briefed on the Benghazi attack, the response effort was handled by the most senior national security officials in governments. Members of the CSG were of course involved in these meetings and discussions to support their bosses.”

Absent coordination from Counterterrorism Security Group, a senior U.S. counterterrorism official says the response to the crisis became more confused. The official says the FBI received a call during the attack representing Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and requesting agents be deployed. But he and his colleagues agreed the agents “would not make any difference without security and other enablers to get them in the country and synch their efforts with military and diplomatic efforts to maximize their success.”

Let’s remember Obama’s so called promise to get to the bottom of what happened, or did not as the case may be. Obama stated that people would be held responsible and that he has also claimed that “the minute [he] found out what was going on” he issued a directive to “make sure we are securing our personnel and doing whatever we need to do.” As reported at NRO, the latest reports, though, suggest otherwise.

On Friday, Fox News reported that CIA operators in a position to provide air support were told to “stand down.” Now, Eli Lake reports that the State Department did not request backup on the night the attacks took place. Why?

More from the Lonely Conservative, the CIA is now saying that they sent in operatives to Libya to save the diplomats. Hmm, why now are they saying it with mere days before the election?

Yes, Benghazi-Gate makes Watergate pale in comparison.