AG Eric Holder Bashes Sarah Palin on ABC’s ‘This Week’ Says … “She Wasn’t Particularly Good VP Candidate, She’s an Even Worse Judge of Who to Impeach”
Hmm, one might say Eric Holder isn’t a particularly good Attorney General and an even worse judge of what scandals should be prosecuted …
Eric Holder, Barack Obama’s attorney general took to ABC’s ‘This Week’ to bash Sarah Palin stating, “She wasn’t a particularly good vice presidential candidate. She’s an even worse judge of who ought to be impeached and why.” Really? With all the scandals that Holder could be prosecuting and getting to the bottom of, he is bashing Palin? Where is Holder on Benghazi-gate, Fast & Furious and IRS-gate? Where is Eric Holder in enforcing US immigration laws? HOLDER IS AWOL. Holder is the most political, partisan attorney general ever. This political hack will do nothing to investigate an out of control Obama administration because his allegiances lie with Obama, not America and the US Constitution. While we are at it, Eric Holder should be impeached as well. Make it a two-fer.
Administration efforts to pass comprehensive immigration reform, for example, have failed. Asked about calls by Sarah Palin to impeach Obama over the administration’s immigration policies, Holder said: “She wasn’t a particularly good vice presidential candidate. She’s an even worse judge of who ought to be impeached and why.”
Holder similarly dismissed calls for himself to be impeached for declining to appoint a special prosecutor to investigate the IRS scandal. Holder insisted that a special prosecutor isn’t necessary, with “career people” and FBI agents “doing a good, professional job” investigating the matter.
As per Breitbart, House Speaker John Boehner (R-OH) and other senior “establishment” Republicans have dismissed Palin’s calls and instead have opted to file a lawsuit against Obama’s executive overreach. Also, House Judiciary Committee chair Rep. Bob Goodlatte, (R-VA), said on “This Week” that he won’t push for the impeachment of President Obama, despite recent calls by some Republicans. Of course the GOP won’t, they are gutless.
“We are not working on or drawing up articles of impeachment,” Goodlatte told ABC News’ George Stephanopoulos on “This Week” Sunday. “The Constitution is very clear as to what constitutes grounds for impeachment of the President of the United States. He has not committed the kind of criminal acts that call for that.”
Eric Holder is hardly a credible source to talk about a poor candidate for a job or being able to judge anyone. Holder has been a disaster as AG.
Rep. Gowdy Questions AG Holder About Duty to Faithfully Execute the Law
Guess what, Barack Obama was not “The One” that we had been waiting for …
In a recent CNN poll, Barack Obama is now as unpopular as former president George W. Bush. Both Obama and Bush now have a 51% unfavorable rating. Obama’s approval rating has dropped to 47%. However, that most likely is not the low that this president will see before he leaves office, and none too soon. With scandals abound like IRS-gate, Fast & Furious, Benghazi-gate and most recently the VA scandal and the release of 5 Taliban, GITMO detainees for an alleged deserter. Not to mention a continued poor economy, a jobless recovery, a disastrous foreign policy and last but certainly not least, Obamacare. As commented on by Hot Air, a Fox News poll out this week shows continued sharp disapproval of President Obama’s signature domestic “accomplishment,” with a sizable majority expressing the opinion that they wish the 2010 healthcare law had never passed.
Who is laughing now Barack?
In January 2009, as President George W. Bush was days away from leaving the White House, the unpopular President’s favorable rating stood at 35% in a CNN/ORC International survey. The man who was succeeding him, Barack Obama, was fresh from his historic 2008 presidential election victory and had a 78% favorable rating among Americans.
But a new CNN/ORC International poll released Thursday indicates a milestone of sorts: Obama is now as unpopular as Bush. Fifty-one percent have an unfavorable view of Bush; 51% feel the same way about Obama. Obama’s favorable rating is now at 47% – a new low for him, and virtually identical to Bush’s 46% favorable rating, a significant improvement over his 2009 numbers.
Obama started out strong, but as many predicted, the public’s love affair with Obama faded as reality set in. Obama dealt with the severe recession plaguing the nation and pushed for controversial proposals such as the federal stimulus and health care reform. By 2010, the President’s favorable rating had dropped by double digits, although his numbers generally remained in the mid-50s throughout the 2012 presidential campaign.
EXIT QUESTION: Will Barack Obama’s favorable and unfavorable ratings be worse than GWB’s by the end of his presidency … Magic 8-Ball says, “Signs point to Yes”.
Barack Obama Administration Heard Terrorists Using State Dept. Phones During Benghazi Attacks, Eric Stahl U.S. Air Force Commander Speaks … But What Difference Does It Make
BUT WHAT DIFFERENCE DOES IT MAKE, EH HILLARY?
The information keeps trickling in on Benghazi and what both Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton were very much aware of as the attacks occurred. The attacks in Benghazi on the US Consulate, that the Obama administration knowingly and falsely blamed on a video tape, where four Americans died including US Ambassador Chris Stevens took place on September 11, 2012. Now we learn that the Obama administration heard terrorists using US State Department phones the night of the attack. UNREAL!
Interview with Fox News and Bret Baier, ‘Special Report’.
Bret Baier: Bottom line, in the alert status you were in, conceivable if they called early enough you could have evaced those people from Benghazi?
Eric Stahl: Absolutely! If they would have called we could have been down there in 3 hours, basically … We could have gone down there and got them easily.
MUST WATCH VIDEO …
The terrorists who attacked the U.S. consulate and CIA annex in Benghazi on September 11, 2012 used cell phones, seized from State Department personnel during the attacks, and U.S. spy agencies overheard them contacting more senior terrorist leaders to report on the success of the operation, multiple sources confirmed to Fox News.
The disclosure is important because it adds to the body of evidence establishing that senior U.S. officials in the Obama administration knew early on that Benghazi was a terrorist attack, and not a spontaneous protest over an anti-Islam video that had gone awry, as the administration claimed for several weeks after the attacks.
Eric Stahl, who recently retired as a major in the U.S. Air Force, served as commander and pilot of the C-17 aircraft that was used to transport the corpses of the four casualties from the Benghazi attacks – then-U.S. Ambassador to Libya Chris Stevens, information officer Sean Smith, and former Navy SEALs Glen Doherty and Tyrone Woods – as well as the assault’s survivors from Tripoli to the safety of an American military base in Ramstein, Germany.
In an exclusive interview on Fox News’ “Special Report,” Stahl said members of a CIA-trained Global Response Staff who raced to the scene of the attacks were “confused” by the administration’s repeated implication of the video as a trigger for the attacks, because “they knew during the attack…who was doing the attacking.” Asked how, Stahl told anchor Bret Baier: “Right after they left the consulate in Benghazi and went to the [CIA] safehouse, they were getting reports that cell phones, consulate cell phones, were being used to make calls to the attackers’ higher ups.”
Stahl said members of a CIA-trained Global Response Staff who raced to the scene of the attacks were “confused” by the administration’s repeated implication of the video as a trigger for the attacks, because “they knew during the attack…who was doing the attacking.” Asked how, Stahl told anchor Bret Baier: “Right after they left the consulate in Benghazi and went to the [CIA] safehouse, they were getting reports that cell phones, consulate cell phones, were being used to make calls to the attackers’ higher ups.”
A separate U.S. official, one with intimate details of the bloody events of that night, confirmed the major’s assertion. The second source, who requested anonymity to discuss classified data, told Fox News he had personally read the intelligence reports at the time that contained references to calls by terrorists – using State Department cell phones captured at the consulate during the battle – to their terrorist leaders. The second source also confirmed that the security teams on the ground received this intelligence in real time.
Major Stahl was never interviewed by the Accountability Review Board, the investigative panel convened, pursuant to statute, by then-Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, as the official body reviewing all the circumstances surrounding the attacks and their aftermath. Many lawmakers and independent experts have criticized the thoroughness of the ARB, which also never interviewed Clinton nor the under secretary of State for management, Patrick Kennedy, a key figure in the decisions about security at the consulate in the period preceding the attack there.
Posted June 12, 2014 by Scared Monkeys
al-Qaeda, Barack Obama, Benghazi-Gate, Epic Fail, Hillary Clinton, Islam/Muslims, Islamist, Jihad, Liars, Libya, Libyan Consulate - Amb. Stevens, Military, Misleader, Misrepresentation, Murder, Radical Islam, Scandal, State Department, Terrorism, The Lying King, Transparency, United States, War on Terror, WTF, You Tube - VIDEO | 3 comments
Sen. John McCain Questions Swap “Highest High-Risk” Terrorists as White House National Security Adviser Susan Rice Defends United States Negotiating with Terrorists over Exchange of GITMO 5 for U.S. Army Sgt. Bowe Bergdahl
A DANGEROUS PRECEDENT THAT THE US WILL RUE THE DAY …
White House national security adviser Susan Rice went on CNN’s ‘State of the Union’ with Candy Crowley to defend the Obama administration’s decision to exchange five GITMO “high risk” Taliban detainees for U.S. Army Sgt. Bowe Bergdahl. Rice also spun the fact that the Obama administration broke the law in not notifying Congress 30 days prior that there was a negotiation in process. But of course, what difference does it make with this administration, all they do is break the law, thumb their nose at separations of power and The US Constitution. Let alone negotiating with terrorists. How and why would something like this be deemed so sensitive that Congress was not notified? ” Senator Ted Cruz (R-TX) said on ABC’s ‘This Week,’ “What does this tell the terrorists? That if you capture a U.S. soldier, you can trade that soldier for five terrorists Cruz called the prisoner swap “very disturbing.”
White House national security adviser Susan Rice defended the Obama administration’s decision to exchange Guantanamo detainees for U.S. Army Sgt. Bowe Bergdahl, amid criticism that the United States negotiated with terrorists in the process.
She also said the “acute urgency” of Bergdahl’s health condition justified President Obama’s not notifying Congress beforehand that Bergdahl was being swapped for five Taliban detainees at Guantanamo Bay.
“What we did was ensure that, as always, the United States doesn’t leave a man or a woman on the battlefield,” Rice said Sunday on CNN’s “State of the Union.”
Susan Rice went on to parrot President Obama in saying, “What we did was ensure that, as always, the United States doesn’t leave a man or a woman on the battlefield.” However, there appears to be just one little problem with that statement … Sgt. Bowe Bergdahl was not left on the battlefield, by all accounts he left his
From The Daily Caller: CNN’s Candy Crowley Grills Susan Rice: ‘Point Blank, Did The US Negotiate With Terrorists?’
Once again the Obama administration is playing games with words. Newsflash to Susan Rice by the associative property, if a=b and b=c then a=c, you negotiated with terrorists.
CNN host Candy Crowley pressed White House national security adviser Susan Rice on the Taliban prisoner swap conducted Saturday, asking “point blank, did the US negotiate with terrorists” in violation of its long-held policy?
Crowley spoke with Rice on Sunday about the exchange of five high-ranking Taliban detainees — two of which are accused of the mass murder of religious minorities in Afghanistan — for Army Sgt. Bowe Berghdahl, whom many claim was captured after deserting his post and walking into the Afghan wilderness in 2009.
Berghdahl was captured by the Haqqani network, a close ally of the Taliban and an acknowledged terrorist organization according to the State Department.
“Point blank, did the US negotiate with terrorists for his release?” Crowley asked.
“Candy, what we did was ensure that, as always, the United States doesn’t leave a man or woman on the battlefield,” Rice replied. “It’s very important for folks to understand, if we got into a situation where we said because of who has captured an American soldier on the battlefield, we will leave that person behind.”
John McCain went on CBS’s ‘Face the Nation’ and questioned the swap of “highest high-risk people” for U.S. Army Sgt. Bowe Bergdahl. McCain called the GITMO detainees, “These are the hardest of the hard core” and added that he was disturbed the Taliban named the prisoners they wanted in exchange for Bergdahl’s freedom.
Current and former U.S. officials welcomed the return of Sgt. Bowe Bergdahl, the only American soldier held prisoner in Afghanistan, but voiced concern about the release of five members of the Taliban who had been held at the Guantanamo Bay as part of a negotiated prisoner swap.
“These are the hardest of the hard core. These are the highest high-risk people, and others that we have released have gone back into the fight,” said Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., in an interview on “Face the Nation,” adding that he was disturbed the Taliban named the prisoners they wanted in exchange for Bergdahl’s freedom.
Hmm, where were the calls from the State Department and Hillary Clinton to heed the warnings and requests from Ambassador Stevens in 2011 in Benghazi?
The US State Department issued a warning on Tuesday to avoid traveling to Libya and telling Americans currently in Libya to leave immediately due to security concerns. What, like the downward spiraling security situation in Libya has not been precarious for years? The evacuation warning came shortly after the USS Bataan, with about 1,000 Marines aboard, sailed into the Mediterranean Sea to assist Americans in leaving if necessary. So how is that Obama foreign policy in Libya working? Obama has managed to make a bad situation, even worse. But as Democratic wannabe presidential hopeful and former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton says, “What difference does it Make”.
What’s the matter, Obama “#” foreign policy not working in Libya?
The United States warned its citizens Tuesday to avoid travel to Libya and advised that all Americans currently in that country leave immediately due to a precarious security situation.
“Due to security concerns, the Department of State has limited staffing at Embassy Tripoli and is only able to offer very limited emergency services to U.S. citizens in Libya,” a statement read.
The State Department said the security situation in Libya remains unstable almost three years since a revolution deposed the late leader Moammar Gadhafi. Military-grade weapons, including antiaircraft weapons, are in the hands of private individuals, the State Department warned.
Other threats come from extremist groups, which the U.S. says have made specific threats against American officials and citizens. The statement issued Tuesday warned that “travelers should be aware that they may be targeted for kidnapping, violent attacks, or death.”
The Department of State warns U.S. citizens against all travel to Libya and recommends that U.S. citizens currently in Libya depart immediately. Due to security concerns, the Department of State has limited staffing at Embassy Tripoli and is only able to offer very limited emergency services to U.S. citizens in Libya. This Travel Warning supersedes the Travel Warning issued on December 12, 2013.
The security situation in Libya remains unpredictable and unstable. The Libyan government has not been able to adequately build its military and police forces and improve security following the 2011 revolution. Many military-grade weapons remain in the hands of private individuals, including antiaircraft weapons that may be used against civilian aviation. Crime levels remain high in many parts of the country. In addition to the threat of crime, various groups have called for attacks against U.S. citizens and U.S. interests in Libya. Extremist groups in Libya have made several specific threats this year against U.S. government officials, citizens, and interests in Libya. Because of the presumption that foreigners, especially U.S. citizens, in Libya may be associated with the U.S. government or U.S. NGOs, travelers should be aware that they may be targeted for kidnapping, violent attacks, or death. U.S. citizens currently in Libya should exercise extreme caution and depart immediately.
Sporadic episodes of civil unrest have occurred throughout the country and attacks by armed groups can occur in many different areas; hotels frequented by westerners have been caught in the crossfire. Checkpoints controlled by militias are common outside of Tripoli, and at times inside the capital. Closures or threats of closures of international airports occur regularly, whether for maintenance, labor, or security-related incidents.
So what is the difference between Benghazi in 2011 and Libya today? Can you say Barack Obama’s 2012 reelection and his BS campaign slogan that Al-Qaeda was on the run. A note to those that embrace being uniformed … Benghazi is in Libya.
Posted May 28, 2014 by Scared Monkeys
al-Qaeda, America - United States, Barack Obama, Benghazi-Gate, Community Agitator, Epic Fail, Foreign Policy, Islamist, Jihad, Libya, Misleader, Obamanation, Radical Islam, State Department, Terrorism, United States, US National Security, War on Terror | one comment
Senator Diane Feinstein (D-CA) Calls Benghazi Special Committee: ‘It’s a Hunting Mission for a Lynch Mob”
I think the Democrats protest too much …
On Sunday during CNN’s State of the Union with Candy Crowley, liberal Senator Dianne Feinstein D-CA) called the House Select Committee on Benghazi is “ridiculous.” and said … “I think it’s a hunting mission for a lynch mob.” However, the American people overwhelmingly think different from Di-Fi as 67% support the creation of a Benghazi Special Committee and 51% believe the Obama Administration knowingly lied about blaiming a video tape for the terror attack for political purposes.
Full transcript HERE.
For Democrats, its all about protecting Hillary Clinton’s back side at this point for 2016.
FOX News Poll: 67% Support Creation of Benghazi Special Committee … 51% Believe Obama Admin Knowingly Lied About Blaiming Video Tape for Political Purposes
The Obama White House, Hillary Clinton and Democrats are overwhelmingly on the wrong side of the American people when it comes to finding the truth as to what happened in Benghazi and who covered it up.
According to a recent FOX News poll, an amazing 67% believe that a special committee should be created in order to investigate the Obama administrations decisions and activities surrounding the 2012 terrorist attack in Benghazi, Libya that resulted in the death of four Americans, including US ambassador Chris Stevens. This as Barack Obama, former secretary of state Hillary Clinton, Harry Reid, Nancy Peleosi and the rest of Democrats scoff at the idea of a special committee as a conspiratorial witch hunt. Sorry, but 67% is hardly a minority of people just out to get Obama. The poll also finds that 51% of respondents believe that Obama administration “knowingly lied” about the September 11, 2012 terrorist attacks on the U.S. consulate in Benghazi, Libya “to help the President Obama during his re-election campaign” against Mitt Romney.
Complete FOX News Poll can be seen HERE.
Fully two-thirds of the public endorses the propriety and necessity of forming this select committee, which all but seven House Democrats opposed. Fewer than 30 percent have embraced the official White House line on the matter — and by a 16-point margin, Americans say the Obama administration’s general goal has been to deceive, rather than elucidate the truth, regarding Benghazi.
More numbers lay bare the depth of the public’s cynicism over this entire episode: A majority (51/39) believes Obama’s team “knowingly lied” about the cause of the attack to boost the president’s re-election bid, and a similarly-sized majority (50/40) says Hillary Clinton has been deceitful about the raid. Seventy-two percent of respondents believe the Obama administration bears at least some responsibility for what happened, with another super-majority (68/27) blaming the administration for the fact that nobody has been brought to justice for the assassinations.
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.
DNC Chairwoman Debbie Wasserman Schultz Says GOP Using Benghazi to ‘Gin Up Their Base’ Ahead of 2014 Midterm Elections
Democratic National Committee Chairwoman Debbie Wasserman Schultz (D-FL) and Rep. Michelle Bachmann (R-MN) squared off against one another over politicizing the Benghazi investigation this morning on CNN’s ‘State of the Union’. Debbie Wasserman Schultz accused the GOP of using the Benghazi investigation to drive their base for voter turnout, since they lost on Obamacare. Hmm, lost on Obamacare? Americans are the ones who lost on Obamacare. Bachmann stated that the Democrats have tried to sabotage the investigation process from the beginning. A fact that is most plainly see by the recent revealed Ben Rhodes email that was purposely kept from the committees investigating Benghazi.
“I think it’s important that this is a dialogue and not a monologue, ” Minnesota congresswoman said, adding later, “It’s really clear that the Democrats have tried to sabotage this process from the very beginning,”
Laughing, Wasserman Schultz said, “We don’t have the ability to sabotage.”
One would think that any politician would want to get to the truth of Benghazi and why the American people were mislead by a presidential administration, no matter what the party affiliation. Not Democrats.
Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz said Republicans are digging up the issue of the 2012 attack in Benghazi to drive turnout this election year.
Schultz, chairwoman of the Democratic National Committee, told CNN’s Candy Crowley on Sunday that as the issue of health care fails rile up their base, House Republicans are refocusing their attention on the assault that left four Americans dead, including the ambassador to Libya.
Schultz appeared Sunday on CNN’s “State of the Union” with Rep. Michele Bachmann, a conservative from Minnesota who ran for president in 2012.
“The big question on many people’s minds is, where did this false narrative come from, to blame a video rather than the terrorist actions of Ansar al-Sharia, which were evident on the ground,” Bachmann said. “So I think that what this committee is doing is taking a very careful look at a very deliberate pace to go through depositions and people on the ground to find out the truth of what happened. That’s all people want is the truth.”
The Obama administration first linked the attack to protests sparked by an anti-Muslim film produced in the United States, which had incited violence in other regions at the time. However, it was later revealed to be a coordinated terrorist attack.
Rep. Adam Schiff (D-CA) Says Democrats May Not Participate in Benghazi Committee, “Colossal Waste of Time” … Rep. Peter King (R-NY) Blasts Boycott of Probe as “Terribly Arrogant” and “Wrong”
Why don’t Democrats want to get to the truth?
Rep. Adam Schiff (D-CA) said on Fox News Sunday with Chris Wallace that he would recommend congressional Democrats not participate in the recently announced Select Committee on Benghazi. Rep. Peter King (R-NY) responded that by doing so would be “terribly arrogant” and “wrong.” King went on to say that, “If Democrats boycott this committee, refuse to take part, the American people are going to conclude, and I think quite rightly, that they feel they have something to hide.” On Friday, House Speaker John Boehner said the House would vote on a select committee to investigate the Sept. 11, 2012, attacks. Rep. Trey Gowdy (R-SC) will lead a Select Committee investigation on White House Benghazi scandal.
“I think it is a colossal waste of time … I don’t think it makes sense really for Democrats to participate. It’s just a tremendous red herring, and a waste of taxpayer resources … I don’t think it makes sense for us to give this Select Committee any more credibility than it deserves.”
Imagine that, Democrats think it is a waste of time to get to the truth. As stated by Protein Wisdom, “Democrats make it clear: Obama’s political reputation more important than American lives.” I would also add, protecting Hillary Clinton’s bacon.
Rep. Peter King, R-N.Y., said doing so would be “terribly arrogant” and “wrong.”
The call for a boycott was made earlier by Rep. Adam Schiff, D-Calif., during an interview on “Fox News Sunday.” He was responding to House Speaker John Boehner’s announcement Friday that the House would vote on a select committee to investigate Benghazi.
The congressman said Democrats should not give the select committee more “credibility” by joining, dismissing new evidence that Republicans have called a “smoking gun” showing the White House politicized the tragedy.
“I think it’s a colossal waste of time,” said Schiff, also a member of the intelligence panel. “I don’t think it makes sense, really, for Democrats to participate.”
King, speaking afterward with Fox News, said this would be a “mistake” for Democrats as it would show they “cannot defend the administration.”
“If Democrats boycott this committee, refuse to take part, the American people are going to conclude, and I think quite rightly, that they feel they have something to hide,” King said.