Previous post:

Next post:

Carney Slams “Attempts to Politicize” Benghazi

by Keith Koffler on May 8, 2013, 2:35 pm

White House Press Secretary Jay Carney today dismissed the Benghazi controversy as a third rate burglary as nothing more than the politicization of a “tragedy” that has already been thoroughly investigated.

“This is a subject that has from its beginning been subject to attempts to politicize it by Republicans, when in fact what happened in Benghazi was a tragedy,” Carney said. “We’re at a place where there are attempts to politicize this when that should not be the case.”

Here’s some of Carney’s defense of the administration:

H/T to Politico.

{ 33 comments }

RickW May 8, 2013 at 2:38 pm

When are they going to open Jay’s sessions with music? Perhaps Captain Kangeroo’s theme? Maybe Mr. Rogers?

I watched some old clips of Baghdad Bob and he was more credible.

mikec May 8, 2013 at 4:28 pm

Jay is so funny. I get such a kick out of listening to him.
That statement from the most “politicizing” administration in history. What an example of not being able to take what you dish out.

Playrighter May 8, 2013 at 2:48 pm

How can a search for the truth be political based on who might end up looking bad?

Why isn’t a simple question being asked of Obama — and Carny — every single day: Why in eight months since the attacks in Benghazi have ZERO witnesses been heard from?

or in the words of a better inquisitor: Whose side are you on?

Julie Brueckheimer May 8, 2013 at 2:53 pm

Whether it’s Benghazi, Boston, Fort Hood and so on, the Democrats refuse to use the word ‘terrorism’ and substitute ‘tragedy’ instead. Repeatedly. This is has become a policy for them.

Lizzy May 8, 2013 at 4:10 pm

How low can you go to do this to people who lost loved ones in the line of duty? There must be a extra large place in the seventh
circle of hell it’s past repulsive.

mikec May 8, 2013 at 4:30 pm

I’ll tell you how low you can go. Check out Breitbart.com and that clown congressman from MD droning on about “death is a part of life”
What a stomach turner!

Mark Holbrook May 8, 2013 at 6:05 pm

Your are too kind. I would place all of the cover up by the administration (Obama, Clinton and Carney) on the 9th step!

cincycinco May 8, 2013 at 3:01 pm

“What is truth?” – Pontius Pilate

These were the words of another big-Government flunky who had to trim the sails of “truth” to match his political reality. In HIS case, he had a patently innocent man before him – he said so himself – that, nevertheless, had to die for Pilate to preserve his OWN political situation. Whether Jesus was a good man or bad, Son of G_d or not, didn’t matter. Pilate’s politics said Jesus must die a horrible, excrutiating death so Pilate could save his own skin.

That was Pilate’s “Truth”.

What do you suppose Carney’s is? What do you suppose Obama’s is? Do you think it may be something like Pilate’s?

Stay tuned, and we’ll see…

SIde note; do you think Pilate ever came to regret that decision? Do you think he may still, even today, be paying for it? I suspect he may be…and these folks may well keep him company, when they stand before a Judge that CAN’T be decieved and isn’t impressed by Obama’s skin tone, since He gave it to him in the first place…

And not even Harry Reid will be able to save him. Harry may be too busy answering for his OWN “truths” to worry about his boss’s…

Lizzy May 8, 2013 at 4:44 pm

Hate to use this man but

“It also gives us a very special, secret pleasure to see how unaware the people around us are of what is really happening to them.” —Hitler (see)

Make the lie big, make it simple, keep saying it, and eventually they will believe it.–Adolf Hitler

srdem65 May 8, 2013 at 3:12 pm

You bet it’s “political”, what else could it be. It’s “political” because politicians decided it wouldn’t be a good idea to make a show of military force in Libya that would make the “political” regime look bad there, and because they decided any reactive action might cause harm to MrObama’s “political” future.

No one is suggesting that a “political” decision was made to allow the deaths of the four Americans. The “political” decision was to keep a hands-off response and hope that the attack would just run out of energy.
The events in Benghazi that resulted in the deaths of four Americans and the wounding of another unknown number were the results of bad “political” decisions of MrObama and MrsClinton.

ImNoDhimmi May 8, 2013 at 4:16 pm

Barry was relying on the American people to care as little for the victims of Benghazi as he does.

Julie Brueckheimer May 8, 2013 at 4:28 pm

And the jury is still out on the American people, not on those writing here of course. This is a watershed moment about who we are.

amoureux de la vie May 8, 2013 at 3:16 pm

Can’t even begin to “blame” this on Bush, eh? Impeachment time is just around the corner. Let the process begin……..

bonnie cox May 8, 2013 at 4:18 pm

Article II, Section 4, of the U.S. Constitution states, “The President, Vice President and all civil officers of the United States, shall be removed from office on impeachment for, and conviction of, treason, bribery, or other high crimes and misdemeanors.”

Read more at http://www.wnd.com/2013/05/obamas-departure-predicted-as-congress-focuses-on-cover-up/#97AWmOgmswxoohxK.99

Star May 8, 2013 at 3:29 pm

The moment it became about “protect the candidate,” it was politicized, but not by the Republicans.

RickW May 8, 2013 at 3:33 pm

BINGO!

Bonnie May 8, 2013 at 6:14 pm

Oh, absolutely!!

Star May 8, 2013 at 3:35 pm

If the Republicans slop all over the place, do not drill in, and let this slip through their fingers, well, it’s the last chance on this.
What were Obama and Clinton doing from 5 PM on?
What calls, cables, anything–even to each other–did they make?
Did Hillary know about previous cables and concerns about the place?
Who said no intervention or help should be sent?
Who dreamed up the video stuff? Was Cairo even ABOUT it?
What do the other survivors have to say?
Why could these people not testify until now?
Did Obama depend on crummy staff work to give him deniability?

Misscheryl May 8, 2013 at 4:06 pm

When hillary runs for president in 2016 do you think she’ll tell the nation how ready and able she is to take that 3:00 am phone call? Oh, I guess I’m just being political…never mind.

Michael May 8, 2013 at 4:40 pm

Amazing that 8 months after Benghazi, the White House is still talking about apprehending those responsible and bringing them to justice.

Obviously, just talking about it is enough to satisfy the media. No need to actually do anything…and the White House knows it.

Star May 8, 2013 at 5:22 pm

Almost completely shut out on Fox–so far tonite–by Arias verdict (guilty first degree) and that Cleveland thing. Shows where this ranks in importance.

Star May 8, 2013 at 6:05 pm

Murderer woman trumps murderer Muslims.

rulierose May 8, 2013 at 6:37 pm

er, I was watching Fox too. at 5pm the lame replacement for Beck was on ( “The Five”), and they don’t really count.

but at the 6pm hard-news hour, Bret Baier led with Benghazi, and then talked about the military men who were “relieved of duty” having to do with nukes. only then did they go to the murder and kidnaping stories. (they’re back to Benghazi now, at 6:30.)

the whole time Fox was covering all that, MSNBC was on the story of the three freed Ohio women.

I know because I was writing it down, charting it for a friend of mine. (I’m trying to convince her that Fox does real news.) and also because I’m a complete politics nerd, and have nothing better to do!

rulierose May 8, 2013 at 6:52 pm

omg Keith, the crossed-out “third-rate burglary” was EXCELLENT. you should give yourself a raise; you’re really brilliant.

speaking of Watergate, it’s ironic to think when she was a young attorney working with the Senate during the hearings, Hillary Rodham Clinton was obsessed with finding out what the president knew and when he knew it. now? not so much.

Misscheryl May 8, 2013 at 6:53 pm

Gee, we can watch Jodie Arias the liar or Jay Carney the liar….

Torqued May 8, 2013 at 8:41 pm

ESAD, you evil little gnome.

justine May 8, 2013 at 8:58 pm

“…a “tragedy” that has already been thoroughly investigated.”
.
And, after all, what does it matter, anyway?
.

Brenda A. May 8, 2013 at 10:03 pm

I watched almost all of the hearing; it was long but informative. The only Congressmen who tried to politicize this were Democrats. Cummings and Connolly were blatant in their attempts. It was disgusting.

Misscheryl May 9, 2013 at 9:17 am

You can always depend on Cummings to defend a brutha. In this case, #1 brutha barry. What a racist. Actually, democrats use black politicians as their house slaves. Keepin’ it real, on the plantation.

Trochilus May 9, 2013 at 9:38 am

When a professional spokesperson like Jay Carney struggles to put a simple, coherent sentence together, you know that he is internally conflicted. He can obviously feel the depth of exposure, so he accuses others of doing exactly what he and his boss did. What material he has to work with in order to respond to the obvious questions, comes up way short, and he knows it. Persuasion is his goal, but he’d settle for mere coverage of the bases. But he can’t even do that. Jay is grasping for an adequate response; anything to push back with, but there simply is no there there.

Consider this awkward and gobsmacked conflation:

“We’re at a place where there are attempts to politicize this when that should not be the case.”

A place? No, Jay, we are not at a place . . . we are at an impasse. You all were given some leeway as the Benghazi story “evolved” . . . to explain some of the huge holes in your initial story. None of you could even talk about it while it was being investigated by the FBI, and evaluated by the ARB.

Now we come to find out that the Administration’s insulting public contradiction of the Libyan President in the immediate aftermath likely prevented cooperation in getting the FBI to the scene for several weeks, thereby critically compromising any potential forensic gain.

As for the ARB, we have also learned the jaw-dropping fact that the ARB never even interviewed Hillary Clinton regarding her actions that night. But neither you nor she could answer any questions whilst they were conducting their through review! And what did she finally come up with . . . “What difference, at this point, does it make?”

No wonder you can’t cobble together a coherent sentence now, Jay!

Three individuals who are obviously not partisan, have convincingly reinforced the suspicion that the initial response from the Obama Administration was not just an incomplete story based on mistaken assumptions and a dearth of information. Now it is clear that it was a baseless political contrivance, a story line that was deliberately intended to mislead the public in order to hide incompetence and misfeasance at the highest levels, before, during and after the incident.

And yet you are now trying to accuse others of being political? You can’t even tell that lie with a straight face. No wonder you can’t talk.

Danceswithtruth May 9, 2013 at 10:11 am

Excellent summary!

larry May 10, 2013 at 2:56 pm

Do they reall know how stupid they look quoting from the Washigton Post, who everyone knows is in Obama’s pocket and then talking about “pinochios”? LOL

Mann D. Lifeboats May 10, 2013 at 10:30 pm

How much more evidence must we suffer to (1) acknowledge the intellectual, social, psychological, moral, pusillanimous, infantile rot that inhabits and infests our White House and government; and (2) then rise up against it?

Obama, Clinton, Carney, Rice et. al. represent the evil, amoral, violent consciencelessness that pollutes our Republic, society and world.