Previous post:

Next post:

Obama One Week After Benghazi Attack: Video Responsible

by Keith Koffler on May 8, 2013, 10:15 am

As witnesses today make clear that there was real-time information that the Benghazi attack was terrorism, and as reports circulate that initial talking points were changed to suggest it was an anti-Islamic video that was responsible, it’s important to recall that President Obama was still parroting the video line one week after the attack.

From a September 18, 2013 appearance on the David Letterman Show:

I think it’s also worth remembering how the Obama campaign sought to smear Mitt Romney and Paul Ryan for raising legitimate questions about an egregious foreign policy failure that was made even uglier by false explanations.

The Obama campaign accused Romney and Ryan of being “reckless and irresponsible” for focusing on Benghazi and the White House line about a video having caused the tragedy.

“The entire reason this has become the political topic it is – it’s because of Mitt Romney and Paul Ryan,” said the Obama campaign’s most agressive flack, Stephanie Cutter.

Brett Baier of Fox News tore her apart. It’s a compelling exchange that also includes the snippet of Obama suggesting, a week after the attack, that the anti-Islamic video was responsible for Benghazi.

Leave a Comment

{ 2 trackbacks }

{ 49 comments… read them below or add one }

Playrighter May 8, 2013 at 10:30 am

Just another member of the Obama Transparency cabal, demonstrating as much credibility with their pronouncements as Jerry Springer does with his “final thoughts”.

And while she wasn’t referring to integrity, didn’t Sarah Palin say something about putting lipstick on a pit bull?

Reply

Larry May 8, 2013 at 10:35 am

When a fish stink, a fish stinks. The Obama campaign (and it’s STILL a campaign, I will not dignify that circus by calling it an administration) can place “Stick-ups” or “Febreeze” all over the place as much as they want. But in the end, the fish still stinks and even the low – information folks are starting to see that there’s something going on here that will make Watergate look like play time.

Reply

Julie Brueckheimer May 8, 2013 at 10:48 am

A fish begins to stink from its head. Like Pilate, he washed his hands of Benghazi. You’re absolutely right that it is still the Obama campaign and not an Obama administration.

Irony of ironies, there is an article in the Washington Post today, WaPo the hero of Watergate, pretty strongly implying that the Benghazi hearings are a frontal assault on Hillary Clinton for political reasons.

Reply

Star May 8, 2013 at 11:01 am

Sure, they are trying that–why not–see if anyone buys it.

Reply

Playrighter May 8, 2013 at 11:01 am

Why is it that when the facts make Democrats look bad, it’s “political”, yet when allegations make Republicans look bad, it’s “for the good of the country”?

Reply

Jojo May 8, 2013 at 11:52 am

Liberal Logic 101 – What bounces off me, sticks on you!

Reply

Misscheryl May 8, 2013 at 11:57 am

Bigger question…why don’t more people see through this?

Reply

Misscheryl May 8, 2013 at 11:58 am

This post was supposed to be a response to playrighter – sorry for confusion.

Reply

Scottso May 8, 2013 at 10:40 am

Romney backed off on the subject.
What a loser.
Yes, I said it.

Romney backed off and didn’t bring it up at the 3rd debate.
AND THAT IS WHY HE DIDN”T WIN
because he didn’t know how to win.

Reply

Julie Brueckheimer May 8, 2013 at 10:53 am

In defense of Romney, he did want to ‘focus like a laser’ on the economy and jobs, and also he did not have the benefit of the information now coming out. People like you and me sensed what an important and horrendous failure Benghazi was, but I’m not so sure the low info voters were interested. And the press would not have gone along: they are totally in Obama’s camp.

Reply

Scottso May 8, 2013 at 11:25 am

Julie, The way I remember it, is that in the 2nd debate, Candy Crowley helped the President with regards to Libya.

The 3rd debate which was on Foreign Policy, was the right place to bring it up…and yet, Romney didn’t.

At that point I realized that Romney was not in it to win it.

Reply

Julie Brueckheimer May 8, 2013 at 11:31 am

I remember it the same way you do, and you’ve reminded me that the third debate was on foreign policy which I had forgotten, but I just think Romney wouldn’t have gotten anywhere with Benghazi at that point. He did say things after the election too that indicated he did not have fire in his belly.

Reply

Julie Brueckheimer May 8, 2013 at 11:06 am

What makes me angry, Scottso, is that the Senators doing their rushed investigation treated Clinton, their former colleague, with kid gloves and let her off the hook. McCain was one.

Reply

Star May 8, 2013 at 11:20 am

I am not holding Romney responsible on this–although he sort of froze when that woman contradicted him in the third debate. I do wonder about these top commentators and candidates–we seem to have more info than they do sometimes! Maybe it’s our obsessive attention to all this.

Reply

Scottso May 8, 2013 at 11:26 am

as i mentioned to julie, Romney was not in it to win it.
He did well in the first debate but then he tried to coast.

Reply

Star May 8, 2013 at 12:28 pm

I guess I didn’t see it that way. I credit the other team with defining him …and then hammering on the same few things until people believed them–that he was against women, that he was an evil rich guy, blah blah.

Reply

Scottso May 8, 2013 at 11:29 am

i love these hearings. Like nomination hearings, they are timed.
So everyone gets one question and only 1 question, and there is a 3 hour limit. Easiest job interviews ever.
it’s assumed that this hearing is a crimp on the interviewees schedule and they have better things to do.
And half the questions can be answered, “I just don’t recall”

It’s like a kid’s Tball game. Everyone gets up once an inning. And it lasts 3 hours long. Nothing is really accomplished, no one learns anything, and the parents who watched just wasted their time.

Reply

Julie Brueckheimer May 8, 2013 at 11:34 am

Yes, and the Senators and Congressmen are all poised to give speeches and not ask questions, in other words, grandstanding. I’ve read some indications that Darryl Issa is trying to avoid this. We shall see, we shall see.

Reply

george May 8, 2013 at 11:59 am

but the fact that obama lied still remains…

sorry the truth hurts

Reply

Kimbly May 8, 2013 at 12:26 pm

Hmmm… “People Died, Obama Lied”. Think you’re on to something here. To the presses!

Reply

Scottso May 8, 2013 at 10:41 am

ALSO, Susan Rice, Obama and Hillary INSULTED The Libyan President. He said it was an attack, not about a video. AND they said, “NO NO this guy doesn’t know what he’s talking about”

Reply

Star May 8, 2013 at 11:03 am

Actually it was the host country’s duty to defend that consulate also. So if someone got insulted, they can get over it–although now it looks like unjustly insulted.

Reply

Nachum May 8, 2013 at 10:44 am

She looked at the interviewer and lied in his face at record speed. I am in awe at how many lies she could fit into a 4 and a half minute interview.

Reply

DeniseVB May 8, 2013 at 10:44 am

Obama’s week is about to get worse …..

http://press.org/events/navy-seal-team-vi-families

Reply

Julie Brueckheimer May 8, 2013 at 10:56 am

Thanks, Denise. You always come up with interesting links that would just pass me by if you didn’t post them. : – ))

Reply

Mandy Manners May 8, 2013 at 11:03 am
Julie Brueckheimer May 8, 2013 at 11:14 am

Aha! I would not have thought he would have been a flight risk with the Obama/Clinton/Rice crowd painting him as radical anti-Muslim. There is probably a fatwa on him, and he’d feel safer in the USA. Seems a bit strong punishment for a check fraud too.

Reply

Mandy Manners May 8, 2013 at 12:02 pm

It was more than a simple case of fraud. IIRC, he was involved in a ring to commit fraud against a lot of people. Also, he has a record of manufacturing meth, and he violated probaton in that case.

He’s a crook.

Reply

Julie Brueckheimer May 8, 2013 at 12:26 pm

Not defending him, Mandy, but any other crook with a similar record would not be held incommunicado. Someone else said that Mark Levin has repeatedly tried and failed to interview his lawyer. I still think after Obama/Clinton/Rice pointed out his anti-Muslim video to all the world, he wouldn’t have been a flight risk.

Reply

Mandy Manners May 8, 2013 at 12:36 pm

The hearing had an unusual wrinkle as the news media were banned from the courtroom, and reporters had to watch the proceedings on a TV in a different courthouse a couple blocks away. Court officials didn’t give a reason for the decision.

Nakoula’s attorney Steven Seiden sought to have the hearing closed and his client released on $10,000 bail.

SNIP

Reply

Star May 8, 2013 at 11:00 am

We know the big lie–maybe today we can unearth some smaller ones. It was a desperate flurry to intimidate and obfuscate (it’s never good to let me near a dictionary) so this would not balloon up before the election.

Reply

Julie Brueckheimer May 8, 2013 at 11:02 am

I’ll be watching to see if they bring out their alpha shark, Stephanie Cutter, now.

Reply

Star May 8, 2013 at 11:05 am

Well, alpha sharkie sure doesn’t have a Big Job anymore–where is she? Sic transit, sweetie.

Reply

Julie Brueckheimer May 8, 2013 at 11:15 am

She probably does have a job. OFA?

Reply

Star May 8, 2013 at 11:21 am

Probably–don’t know. At least I don’t have to hear from her everyday anymore.

Reply

Playrighter May 8, 2013 at 11:26 am

Harvey Weinstein paid her to help promote “Silver Linings Playbook” for Oscar consideration. She’s now said to be in talks for a new “Crossfire” show, opposite Newt Gingrich.

Personally, I’d pay to see that bloodbath.

Reply

Misscheryl May 8, 2013 at 11:41 am

Cutter is working on a new barry venture. OFA (Organizing for America) and this off of barry’s web page ”

The gun lobby is pretty happy with itself.

They succeeded in scaring members of Congress into voting against something that 90 percent of Americans—and 74 percent of NRA members—support. They like it the way things are, where the most powerful interest groups in Washington get to override the voices of millions of Americans.

OFA will be the grassroots movement that counteracts that. We’re going to show members of Congress that, if you stand up to the special interests, the people in your districts will be right there to get your back…”

Reply

Jojo May 8, 2013 at 12:01 pm

I love how they just pull numbers from the air and NEVER get called on it. I must know the wrong people, because it is more like 10% of the people I know support Obama’s gun control crap. The other 90% are vehemently opposed. I know, they are dyslexic, got it cornfused…

Reply

Star May 8, 2013 at 12:30 pm

Stephie saying that and not you, Miss Cheryl?–I am confused.

Reply

Misscheryl May 8, 2013 at 12:33 pm

“That” is off the OFA webpage.

Reply

Misscheryl May 8, 2013 at 11:37 am

tar, feather, pole!

Reply

Misscheryl May 8, 2013 at 12:02 pm

This will all be filed away like Fast and Furious … nothing to see here.

Reply

Star May 8, 2013 at 1:34 pm

I watched a few mins of the hearing at lunch. What is UP with Issa referring to Eleanor Holmes Norton as “the young lady.” She is his Colleague, the Member, or Ms Norton. I am no fan of her sour-faced self but this is just wrong.

Reply

cincycinco May 8, 2013 at 1:35 pm

“Obama One Week After Benghazi Attack: Video Responsible”

…and I think George Bush was playing the part of The Prophet, too! And it was Mormons that actually paid for the video, wasn’t it? And what a TOTAL coincidence that it boiled over on 9/11, huh? So, let’s keep an eye on those Evangelical Christians, folks, you just can’t trust ‘em…

(sarc)

Reply

Misscheryl May 8, 2013 at 1:55 pm

If jihadists were killed, there would be an investigation by democrats.

Reply

cincycinco May 8, 2013 at 1:44 pm

I will go THIS far with Hillary, though. While it does prove – once AGAIN – that Obama and his ilk are chronic liars, what difference DOES it make about the video or not?

I’m FAR more interested in the fact that a President can watch his Ambassador and other brave heroes die because they don’t fit his political calculus…

I’m FAR more interested in who told our nearby forces to “Stand Down” while the attack was still going on…
http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-250_162-57583014/diplomat-u.s-special-forces-told-you-cant-go-to-benghazi-during-attacks/

I’m FAR more interested in a President that can go to sleep while sovereign United States terrirory is invaded so he can be fresh for a political fund raiser the next day…

I’m FAR more interested in a President that can set his minions to lying to cover up his transgressions – and how it is that the minions themselves eagerly do just that…

I’m FAR more interested in how the President STILL hasn’t gone to Congress over his orignial attacks on Libya that made Benghazi possible in the first place, and why he has STILL not been held to Constitutional account…

Let them have the stupid “video” thing. Everyone already knows it’s as real as his “Birth Certificate” anyway. Let’s get to talking about all the treason that followed…

Reply

Misscheryl May 8, 2013 at 1:55 pm

These politicians are loyal to their party, not Americans.

Reply

James Gonzalez November 13, 2013 at 11:01 pm

Kidding me…Turkey stopped forces from leaving their base…also the birther thing, old and ignorant.

Reply

James Gonzalez November 13, 2013 at 10:59 pm

So are they talking points or is there a video of him stating it to the UN? Because Tony Katz radio stated that there is a video of President Obama making the statement.

Reply