Gay Patriot Header Image

Fine, Mr. President, have that discussion, tell us what you know about Benghazi

Posted by B. Daniel Blatt at 2:18 am - November 15, 2012.
Filed under: Benghazi / Libya crisis,Obama Incompetence

In his press conference yesterday, President Obama seemed irritated when Jonathan Karl asked him about the Senator John McCain and Senator Lindsay Graham’s determination to block U.N. Ambassador Susan Rice’s potential nomination to be Secretary of State:

As I said before, she made an appearance at the request of the White House in which she gave her best understanding of the intelligence that had been provided to her. If Senator McCain and Senator Graham and others want to go after somebody, they should go after me. And I’m happy to have that discussion with them. But, for them to go after the U.N. Ambassador. . . .

Well, Mr. President, that U.N. Ambassador did go on a number of Sunday shows to put forward a theory at odds — even then — with what Libyan authorities were saying. They did not think that an obscure internet video had sparked the attacks.

Allahpundit (who links the video) asks the pertinent question:

What on earth was Rice doing on the Sunday shows in the first place? Two months later, I’ve yet to see an explanation of that in the media. She’s the ambassador to the UN; she has no firsthand knowledge of what happened in Benghazi the way, say, Hillary or Petraeus or John Brennan or Tom Donilon or other people who dealt with the crisis would have.

So, Mr. President, you want to have that discussions, let’s have that discussion, why did the administration dispatch Ambassador Rice to those talk shows and instructed her to say what she said?  Was it that she was unfamiliar with the situation and so could repeat the administration talking points without doubting their veracity?  And are you saying that a potential Secretary of State shouldn’t be held responsible for her words?

The Democrat seemed quite petulant in responding to Karl’s question as if it was entirely inappropriate to second guess the words of an official in his administration.

Paul Mirengoff hold that “if Obama is sincere” about the need for accountability and his eagerness to cooperate, “then he should testify before Congress about all aspects of Benghazi.”  Indeed.

The president yesterday really did seem to need to lash out at someone yesterday.  Wonder why.

UPDATE:  As usual, Charles Krauthammer sees through Obama’s theatrics, contending that Obama may soon regret having made his faux-chivalrous gesture:

Via Doug Powers at Michelle Malkin.

Share

4 Comments

  1. It’s convenient that he’s so willing to discuss this now that the election is over. Senator McCain should call his bluff. If shielding his team of misfits is where Obama chooses to spend his political capital, the GOP needs to make it count.

    Comment by Jimmy — November 15, 2012 @ 2:46 am - November 15, 2012

  2. Hillary took responsibility for Benghazi’s security failures, and Obama tried to throw her under the bus. If it’s Hillary’s fault, then we shouldn’t falsely blame Obama. That makes no sense.

    Anyone who is at fault should be blamed. Who lied on TV? Susan Rice. Is lying okay by Obama? (rhetorical question)

    Clearly Obama is also to blame. He is the president, after all, and “the buck stops” with him. He has been involved in covering up the facts, and, with this interview, he seems to be suggesting that he also was involved in directing Ms Rice to lie in the aftermath.

    If Obama did direct Rice to lie, then of course he should be held at fault for that, too, but Rice shouldn’t be completely off the hook just because she was “following orders” when any reasonable person would know that those orders are morally wrong.

    Comment by Mitch — November 15, 2012 @ 4:33 am - November 15, 2012

  3. Is there really anyone who thinks the president didn’t know when Rice hit those shows on Sunday that Benghazi was a terrorist attack and not about a movie?

    I would love for Obama to have that conversation but we all know he didn’t mean it.

    Comment by Just Me — November 15, 2012 @ 6:52 am - November 15, 2012

  4. Is it just me or did Obama actually stab himself:

    “…she gave her best understanding of the intelligence that had been provided to her.”

    In the raw, Obama is at least seeming to say that “the fool Rice did really well based on what she knew which was not much.”

    With slight nuance, Obama is seeming to say that “she was sent out to say what she was told to say.”

    With a dash of cynicism, Obama is seeming to say “don’t hit the girl, she was just the puppet, not the puppet master.”

    Graham and McCain have been told by Obama to leave the girl alone and come after him. Right. As if the President does not have Executive Privilege and the Separation of Powers makes subpoenaing the President a non-starter.

    So, Graham and McCain are perfectly within their rights to make Susan Rice’s role in the Benghazi cover-up story a massive issue in her nomination confirmation testimony.

    Bill Clinton sent both Zoë Baird and Kimba Wood as nominees for Attorney General before he finally he finally got Janet Reno past the confirmation process in the Senate.

    George Bush sent Clarence Thomas before the Senate and Biden, Metzenbaum and Kennedy led the charge of brutalizing him with innuendo and out and out malicious verbal kidney punches.

    Obambi certainly seems to be threatening Graham and McCain. While they are Tweedle Dee and Tweedle Dum and joined at the hip, they are also mavericks with prickly skin and stealth fangs. Good luck with poking sticks at those two. When you poke one, you poke the other at the same time, and vice versa.

    Comment by heliotrope — November 15, 2012 @ 10:32 am - November 15, 2012

RSS feed for comments on this post.

Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.