More Shameful Media Bias … CNN Moderator Candy Crowley Leaps to Defend Obama During Presidential Debate on Benghazi Act of Terror Question

Prior to the debate, many were concerned that CNN’s Candy Crowly was going to defy the debate contract. After tonight’s performance, moderator Crowly not only defied the contract but also decided to double-team GOP Presidential candidate Mitt Romney when she decided to interject herself into the debate and defend Obama on a key Benghazi question. Simple shameful.

In an interview with CNN this afternoon, Candy Crowley reiterated that, like past town-hall debate moderators, she intends to do more than just hold the microphone at tonight’s debate in Hempstead, N.Y. — an intention that has caused concern for both campaigns.

At debates end, it was only the Romney camp that needed to be concerned as the CNN Moderator showed her true colors and that she was in the tank for Obama when Crowley interjected herself in the debate as a real time fact checker and got it 100% wrong. But of course she was defending Obama so truth be damned. Watch the video below where the moderator steps in to defend Obama when the President had never called the Benghazi attack a terrorist attack in the Rose Garden.

News Busters has the transcript of the exchange. It was the only time during the debate that the moderator moved to correct one of the candidates. Because we all know that Obama told the truth 100% of the time.

“I think it’s interesting the president just said something, which is that on the day after the attack he went into the Rose Garden and said that this was an act of terror,” Romney said.

“That’s what I said,” Obama replied.

“You said in the Rose Garden the day after the attack, it was an act of terror,” said Romney. “It was not a spontaneous demonstration, is that what you’re saying?”

“Please proceed governor,” said Obama.

“I want to make sure we get that for the record because it took the president 14 days before he called the attack in Benghazi an act of terror,” said Romney.

“Get the transcript,” Obama replied.

For the first time during the debate, Crowley moved to correct one of the candidates.

“He did, in fact, sir. So let me — let me call it an act of terror…”

“Can you say that a little louder, Candy?” Obama asked.

“He — he did call it an act of terror. It did as well take — it did as well take two weeks or so for the whole idea there being a riot out there about this tape to come out. You are correct about that,” Crowley clarified.

UPDATE I: Candy Crowley disgraced herself tonight by showing her true liberal colors and defended Obama when he lied and she was 100% incorrect. Way to shill for Obama you partisan hack.

UPDATE II: Obama: “no acts of terrorism”, 1:50 mark. Check out the video of what Obama actually said in the Rose Garden. The President never said it was an act of terrorism … HE LIED TONIGHT.

More from NRO …

His only mention of “terror”:

No acts of terror will ever shake the resolve of this great nation, alter that character, or eclipse the light of the values that we stand for.  Today we mourn four more Americans who represent the very best of the United States of America.

Secretary of State Hillary Clinton Says, I Take Responsibility” for Diplomats’ Security in Libya … the Buck Stops with Hillary?

Hillary Clinton takes responsibility for security failure in Libya, I guess we know who wears the pants in this Administration.

Secretary of State Clinton said she takes responsibility when it comes to security concerns in Libya in the run up to the attack on the U.S. consulate in Benghazi where four Americans were murdered, including U.S. Ambassador Stevens. So the “buck stops here” with Hillary Clinton, eh? And we always thought as Harry Truman said, that “the buck stops here” with the President. However, not when it comes to pass the buck Obama. As stated at Weasel Zippers, how convenient this comment is made the day before the next Presidential debate.

“I take responsibility,” Clinton said during a visit to Peru. “I’m in charge of the State Department’s 60,000-plus people all over the world, 275 posts. The president and the vice president wouldn’t be knowledgeable about specific decisions that are made by security professionals. They’re the ones who weigh all of the threats and the risks and the needs and make a considered decision.”

But she said an investigation now under way will ultimately determine what happened at the U.S. Consulate in Benghazi, where Ambassador Chris Stevens and three other Americans were killed on September 11.

“I take this very personally,” Clinton said. “So we’re going to get to the bottom of it, and then we’re going to do everything we can to work to prevent it from happening again, and then we’re going to work to bring whoever did this to us to justice.”

This hardly puts to rest the story of how a security debacle became a lie to the American people as to how this occurred long after the Obama administration was aware that the cause of the attacks was terrorism, not a video. But wait, uno momento por favor … why did it take five weeks for Hillary to fall on this political grenade? Better yet, why is she not resigning from office for such a catastrophic failure?

With all due respect to Hillary Clinton, that although her stepping up to the plate and taking responsibility for the security problems in Libya   , that does not even come close to explaining the coverup that took place after the killings, the blaming of the attacks on a video trailer, UN Ambassador Rice’s appearances 5 days later on the networks lying to the American people and Joe Biden’s comments during last week’s vice presidential debate that the White House did not know of requests to enhance security at Benghazi, contradicting testimony by State Department employees.

Doug Ross questions “I want to avoid some kind of political gotcha”. Political gotcha?

An Ambassador is dead and the administration trotted out a series of lies from the outset. And the key questions remain unanswered:

• Who ordered security removed from Ambassador Stevens when he and other personnel were requesting more security?

• Who made up the story about the video and the non-protest in Libya?

• And why were the false stories promoted for weeks on end?

Benghazi-gate: Axelrod defends White House on Libya & Throws Hillary Clinton and State Department Under the Obama Bus

It all depends on what “we”, is … Wasn’t this the White House that promised us transparency? The Obama White House continues the blame game and the buck stops some where else.

Obama senior adviser David Axelrod went on FOX News Sunday and got his lunch handed to him by host Cris Wallace as Axelrod tried to deflect blame from Barack Obama and threw Hillary Clinton under the bus. Axelrod was questioned by Wallace as to Joe Biden’s comment during the VP debate that the White House had no knowledge that requests for security in Libya were rejected. Axelrod stated that the State Department was responsible for embassy security matters. Hmm, now Obama WH trying to toss Hillary Clinton under the bus?

FOX News Sunday (see full transcript HERE):

WALLACE: But, David, just the day before, several State Department officials testified under oath that there were repeated requests for more security that were rejected. What is the vice president talking about?

AXELROD: I think the vice president was talking about what the White House knew. There are embassies all over the world and installations all over the world, and these requests go into the security professionals at the State Department. And there is no doubt, some of these matters went into the security department at the state security agency at the State Department. But it didn’t come to the White House and that what is the vice president was responding to.

WALLACE: So, we’re now getting into a definition of what the word “we” means. When the vice president says “we” he’s not talking about the Obama administration, because, the question was not about what you knew, it is that there were requests for more security. Biden is not talking about the Obama administration. He’s not talking about the State Department.

He’s just talking about himself and the president?

AXELROD: No, I think, Chris. Again, he was talking about was what he, the president knew because these matters were being handled at the State Department.

Read more

The Blame Game: Obama Deputy Campaign Manager Stephanie Cutter Says Benghazi Is Only an Issue ‘Because of Romney and Ryan’

First it was a tape and now the Obama Administration is blaming Romney and Ryan for Benghazi?

Just when you thought that the Obama Administration could not get any worse … Barack Obama deputy campaign manager Stephanie Cutter says that the only reason why the Benghazi, Libya consulate attack is an issue is because of Mitt Romney and Paul Ryan.

UNBELIEVABLE.

The Obama White House is incapable of taking responsibility for anything, including the lack of security and refused requests for a Marine detail in Benghazi. The result, a terrorist attack on the anniversary of 9-11 that say US Ambassador Stevens and three other murdered. Four people are dead and the Obama White House and State Department look like incompetent fools and Cutter wonders why this is a story? If we actually had a non-bias media, this story would be a far bigger scandal than Watergate ever was. The deceit from the Obama WH is beyond comment. First they play the blame game on the economy and now the aftermath of the deaths of four Americans? As aptly stated by the Lonely Conservative, “it is reckless and irresponsible is leaving our diplomats in an unsafe area without security and then lying about it.”

STEPHANIE CUTTER: In terms of the politicization of this — you know, we are here at a debate, and I hope we get to talk about the debate — but the entire reason this has become the political topic it is, is because of Mitt Romney and Paul Ryan. It’s a big part of their stump speech. And it’s reckless and irresponsible what they’re doing.

BROOKE BALDWIN: But, Stephanie, this is national security. As we witnessed this revolution last year, we covered it–

CUTTER: It is absolutely national security–

BALDWIN: –it is absolutely pertinent. People in the American public absolutely have a right to get answers.

UPDATE I: The Romney campaign responded to Cutter’s remark in a statement Thursday afternoon:

“President Obama’s campaign today said that Libya is only an issue because of Mitt Romney and Paul Ryan. They’re wrong. The reason it is an issue is because, for the first time since 1979, an American ambassador was assassinated and President Obama’s foreign policy strategy of ‘leading from behind’ is failing. This administration has continually misled the American public about what happened in Benghazi and, rather than be truthful about the sequence of events, has instead skirted responsibility and dodged questions. The American people deserve straight answers about this tragic event and a president who can provide leadership, not excuses.”

In the end, this is what a failed Administration does, blame and deflect from the past four years. The America People deserve answers and the Obama WH just wants to stall and play a four corners offense and hope they win reelection.

Washington Post Confirms Security was Lax before Benghazi Attack, State Dept Did Nothing to Address Issues

As reported at the WAPO, security was woefully nonexistent prior to the attacks at Benghazi. How could that possibly be in a region rife with terrorism and on the anniversary of 9-11? The Post confirms, that the State Department never took those security concerns seriously even with the many indicators that would have shown there more security was required. The result, Ambassador Stevens dead and three others. The Obama Administration has a lot of explaining.

On the eve of his death, U.S. Ambassador J. Christopher Stevens was ebullient as he returned for the first time in his new role to Benghazi, the eastern Libyan city that embraced him as a savior during last year’s civil war. He moved around the coastal town in an armored vehicle and held a marathon of meetings, his handful of bodyguards trailing discreetly behind.

But as Stevens met with Benghazi civic leaders, U.S. officials appear to have underestimated the threat facing both the ambassador and other Americans. They had not reinforced the U.S. diplomatic outpost there to meet strict safety standards for government buildings overseas. Nor had they posted a U.S. Marine detachment, as at other diplomatic sites in high-threat regions.

A U.S. military team assigned to establish security at the new embassy in Tripoli, in a previously undisclosed detail, was never instructed to fortify the temporary hub in the east. Instead, a small local guard force was hired by a British private security firm as part of a contract worth less than half of what it costs to deploy a single U.S. service member in a war zone for a year.

The two U.S. compounds where Stevens and three other Americans were killed in a sustained, brutal attack the night of Sept. 11, proved to be strikingly vulnerable targets in an era of barricaded embassies and multibillion-dollar security contracts for U.S. diplomatic facilities in conflict zones, according to interviews with U.S. and Libyan officials and eyewitnesses in recent days.

Hot Air has much, much more on this tragedy that appears could have been adverted, if the situation had been taken more serious.