Cookies

Notice: This website may or may not use or set cookies used by Google Ad-sense or other third party companies. If you do not wish to have cookies downloaded to your computer, please disable cookie use in your browser. Thank You.


.
Showing posts with label Benghazi. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Benghazi. Show all posts

Sunday, September 6, 2015

Congressman Trey Gowdy Questions About Benghazi


Congressman Trey Gowdy (RC) (Trumps choice for Attorney General if elected President) turned the tables on the media and asked them questions about Benghazi. The silence was deafening. Best video clip I have seen in months. I hope you watch it, it's only 3 minutes.

The Media should be embarrassed by Congressman Trey Gowdy ’ s questions.

This is most certainly the most embarrassing event that has occurred in the last 16 months.

The burden falls on the media who have not done anything to investigate this. After viewing this 3.5 minute video, I urge you to forward it to your friends.


Friday, August 2, 2013

Democrat Scandals That Aren't So 'Phony'




Article by Emily Hulsey appearing on the Independent Journal Review

During his economic address Wednesday, President Obama denounced the recent fixation on ‘phony scandals‘, saying that we need to refocus on things that matter, like the economy. However, a large number of recent political scandals aren’t phony; they’re serious breaches of the public’s trust, and ignoring them won’t make them go away.


Bob Filner
San Diego Mayor
Bob Filner refuses to resign, but he may be entering therapy in response to a recent onslaught of sexual harassment allegations.

Anthony Weiner
Former Congressman and current New York mayoral candidate
Anthony Weiner has been involved in numerous sex scandals, leading voters to question his morals and integrity.

DOJ Record Harvesting
Attorney General Eric Holder had little to say when it was revealed that the Department of Justice harvested journalists' phone records in the search for possible leakers.

Michael Brown
Former DC councilman
Michael Brown recently plead guilty to federal bribery charges after he was caught in an undercover sting operation.

IRS Scandal
The IRS's targeting of conservative groups has spawned a suspension, a resignation, and a lot more questions.

Jesse Jackson, Jr.
aka Ass Hat Junior
The son of Jesse Jackson was just sent to prison for using campaign funds for personal matters.

Good article by Ms Hulsey, however she forgot a couple scandals,............but what's a scandal or two to this administration? - the most scandalous administration in the history of this country?

Fast and Furious
Where the Department of Justice sold over 2,000 assault weapons to the Sinaloan Cartel resulting in not only the death of Border Patrol Agent Brian Terry, but a thousands of Mexican citizens caught in the Cartel wars in Mexico.

Private Funding of Obamacare
Government asking for "donations" to fund Obamacare HHS Sectretary Silly Kathleen Sebelius was caught in an illegal move asking for drugs and medical companies to donate to fund Obamacare. That's like asking death row inamtes to buy their own lethal injection drugs.

Detroit Bankruptcy
Following 51 years of total democratic control, Detroit is going under. 

Chicago Death Zone
Nobody is talking about the death toll of blacks in Chicago.  While the race hustlers like Jesse Jackson Sr, Al Sharpton, Barack Obama, Eric Holder only talk about Treyvon Martin being "gunned down", black youth continue to be killed in Chicago is numbers that rival violence in the Middle East.

But the bigger question is why or how Obama gets on television and lies to the American people that these are "fake" scandals? The why is that a large percentage of the people, uneducated and driven only by their entiltist and hating America agenda will agree with him without any critical thinking. The how is that a product of Obama's unbringing and character.

Friday, June 21, 2013

Obama's Approval Rating Tumble

Lying to the American people and scandal after scandal has taken it's toll,.... President Barack Obama’s job approval rating fell sharply over the past month—from 53 to 45 percent, according to a new CNN poll. Fifty-four percent of Americans disapprove of the job he’s doing, also up from 45 percent, the survey found.

Sixty-one percent disapprove of the way he’s handling government surveillance of Americans in the aftermath of a series of dramatic reports about National Security Agency spying, while 35 percent approve.

Obama's early second term has been buffeted by a series of controversies—not just about the NSA surveillance, but also allegations of misconduct at the IRS and government spying on reporters. The president was expected to address those issues in a new interview with Charlie Rose, which airs Monday night.

What about Edward Snowden, who says he revealed the government’s secret to expose abuses? Forty-four percent approve of what he did, while 52 percent disapprove. Should the U.S. government attempt to bring him back to U.S. soil and prosecute him? Fifty-four percent say yes, 42 percent say no.

Even as the economy picks up steam, the poll found that Obama’s disapproval rating on that issue has ticked up steadily over the first six months of the year, from 51 percent in January, to 54 percent in April, to 57 percent in June.

Is Obama honest and trustworthy? Fifty percent say no, up from 41 percent in mid-May, while 49 percent say yes, down from 58 percent.

Americans are sending mixed messages on the NSA surveillance controversy—43 percent say Obama has gone too far in restricting civil liberties in the name of national security, 38 percent agree with him that he’s found the right balance, and 17 percent say he hasn’t gone far enough.

At the same time, 51 percent say the administration was right to collect the telephone records of Americans. Forty-eight percent say it was wrong.

Approval soars to 66 percent regarding the government’s snooping on personal information over the Internet. Thirty-three percent say it was wrong. (CNN’s question phrasing might have something to do with that. “The government reportedly does not target Internet usage by U.S. citizens and if such data is collected, it is kept under strict controls.”)

Still, it’s not because people don’t think it hasn’t happened to them: 62 percent told CNN they thought the government had collected and stored data about their personal telephone and Internet. Thirty-four percent say they did not think so.

Does the federal government pose an immediate threat to the rights and freedoms of American citizens? A whopping 62 percent say it does, up from 56 percent the last time the question was asked, in February 2010.

The survey had an error margin of plus or minus 3 percentage points.

What suprises me is that anybody approves of Obama, but then again we are a nation of low information voters. More telling poll numbers would be the 75% of Americans who want Benghazi, the IRS scandal, and the AP phone tapping investigated to determine who is at fault for these crimes.

"Americans who will trade liberty for security will deserve and receive neither. " 

Wednesday, May 29, 2013

U.S. Military: We Could Have Saved Ambassador Stevens

An article on American Thinker by By Jonathon Moseley. This article is absolutely clear on the issue. We had forces that could have responded to Banghazi and in time to save lives. Every senior military leader knows this as well as does thousands of service members. The Politicians lied. Obama, Panetta, Dempsey, etc., THEY ALL LIED.

Elite U.S. troops were completely capable of saving Ambassador Chris Stevens during the Benghazi Consulate attacks on September 11, 2012. Elements of the highly specialized Combatant Commanders In-Extremis (CIF) units are always on alert, on forward deployment, ready to respond. Their job description is to hit the ground in 3 to 5 hours. CIF elements are ready to engage in active combat anywhere in their region, 3 to 5 hours after the call.

Leon Panetta, Secretary of Defense at the time, either misled the U.S. Congress or was incompetent. Panetta testified before the Senate Armed Services Committee on February 7, 2013 that the U.S. military could not have responded in less than 9 to 12 hours.

Obama's first secretary of defense, Robert Gates, told CBS's Face the Nation on May 12, 2013 that "[w]e don't have a ready force standing by" in that region.

But we absolutely do "have a ready force standing by" to reach any trouble spot in a few hours. Insider reports previously revealed that CIF elements were training in Croatia and could have been in Benghazi in three and a half hours.

Although rotating out of the United States, some CIF elements are always forward-deployed within each military command region, always on stand-by. Their training includes expertise within each local region. Some of each region's unit is always ready. They don't need to pack. Being ready to go -- immediately -- is their job description. It's the reason they exist.

The U.S. military has developed a range of capabilities, from CIF teams to the Navy SEALs, to Rangers, to Green Berets. But now many in the special forces/special operators community feel betrayed. Commanders in Extremis units are so highly trained and expert that even elite Green Berets wash out of the highly demanding CIF training in large numbers.

Standard military doctrine is to activate all such resources immediately, even if they are ultimately not used. Military's plans require getting such teams in the air and on the way, not waiting to see if they will be needed.

So Panetta's and Gates's statements to the public violate standard military protocol. Leon Panetta telegraphed to our enemies an image of incompetence of U.S. forces. Panetta's testimony was an insult to the U.S. military. Elite forces go through constant, grueling training to be able to do what Panetta and Gates say they cannot do. One of the purposes of "special operators" is deterrence. Panetta and Gates undermined that deterrence.

The U.S. military perfected capabilities after the embassy bombings in Kenya and Tanzania in 1998, the attack on the USS Cole in Yemen in 2000, the 2008 U.S. Embassy bombing in Yemen, and similar events. Gates emphasized the need for planning; Commanders in Extremis forces plan constantly for all contingencies.

CIF units answer directly to the general for each regional command to eliminate delay. Therefore, if AFRICOM -- the U.S. military's regional command for matters involving Africa -- had actually wanted to rescue Ambassador Stevens -- and the classified secrets in the Consulate -- the AFRICOM general would have communicated directly with the CIF team on forward deployment in the region.

Panetta testified that the U.S. military could not react because they didn't know the situation on the ground in Benghazi. In fact, two unmanned drones were overhead, sending real-time video, including infrared and night-vision cameras, back to the national command authority. Everyone but Panetta seems to know how dumb Panetta's statement was.

Panetta testified that we should not send in aircraft without knowing what is happening on the ground. Au contraire. You send in the correct aircraft to find out what is going on. It's called reconnaissance. The U.S. Air Force has been conducting reconnaissance since World War I (then as part of the U.S. Army). Unless maybe our leaders don't want to know.

In fact, it is reported that CIF elements assigned to AFRICOM were already mobilizing and preparing to respond in Southern Europe. But they were ordered to stand down. It is believed they were mobilizing at a U.S./NATO air base in Sigonella, Italy, near Naples.

Sigonella air base is only 475 miles from Benghazi. Fighter jets from Sigonella could have been above Benghazi in 20 minutes from takeoff at the F-16's maximum speed of 1,500 miles per hour. Transports and gunships could have reached the Consulate in 90 minutes from take-off.

F-16s can carry fuel for a flight of 2,000 nautical miles. So the 475-mile flight from Sigonella would have left enough fuel for an hour of operations over the Consulate in Benghazi plus a flight to Andravida Air Base in Greece, only 405 miles away, to land and refuel. Greece is a NATO partner. Later waves could have refueled first in Andravida, 405 miles away.

Meanwhile, the aircraft carrier USS John C. Stennis and its battle group were within range to assist the U.S. Consulate in Benghazi. Rear Admiral Charles Gaouette was relieved of command and flown back to the States on undisclosed allegations of inappropriate judgment, as reported in the military's Stripes magazine. It is widely believed within the U.S. military that Admiral Gaouette was mobilizing a response to come to the aid of Ambassador Stevens but was ordered to stand down. The allegation of "inappropriate judgment" was that Admiral Gaoutte insisted on mounting a rescue, leading to sharp words being exchanged.

Gregory Hicks, Deputy Chief of Mission in Libya, immediately tasked his embassy defense attaché with calling for help from the U.S. military. According to Hicks's testimony on May 8, AFRICOM told the U.S. Embassy in Tripoli that the U.S. airbase in Aviano, Italy could have F-16s over Benghazi in 2-3 hours but that there were no aerial tankers in the area to refuel the F-16s.

That excuse rings false. Throughout Europe, U.S.-compatible standard refueling tankers are always available. That's why they exist. NATO exists so that all NATO countries will come to the aid of any of their fellows when

Furthermore, why Aviano? Sigonella was roughly half the distance. Sigonella's F-16s could have reached Benghazi in 20 minutes from wheels up, conducted action above the Consulate, and returned to Italy or Greece with fuel to spare. Remember: a "spotter" from the Benghazi CIA annex was on the roof of the Consulate, "laser designating" the attackers' mortar team and reporting by radio.

Gates also commented that U.S. F-16s could not have simply buzzed the Benghazi Consulate to scare away the attackers because of the risk of anti-aircraft missiles. Hogwash. For months the year before the U.S. Air Force and NATO jets had strafed and bombed the Libyan military and decimated its anti-aircraft weaponry. And since when are members of the U.S. military afraid to come to the defense of civilians because someone might hurt them?

Even liberal columnist Maureen Dowd commented: "The defense secretary at the time, Leon Panetta, insisted, 'We quickly responded.' But they responded that they would not respond." Dowd sums it up: "All the factions wove their own mythologies at the expense of our deepest national mythology: that if there is anything, no matter how unlikely or difficult, that we can do to try to save the lives of Americans who have volunteered for dangerous assignments, we must do it."

Friday, May 17, 2013

Four Scandals - by Newt Gingrich

Newt Gingrich, as always, presents articulate and analytical verbiage on problems confronting America. The problem this time is that the people elected a corrupt and arrogant President who, in turned, hired a dishonest administration who both are now caught up in scandal after scandal,.... undeniabley so. You can go to Gingrich Productions and sign up for this e-mail newsletter. Read Newt's article below:

When I started writing this it was called "three scandals".

There was the Benghazi Scandal, the IRS Scandal, and the little covered but equally alarming Secretary Sebelius scandal.

Then as I was writing we learned that the Justice Department had secretly obtained two months worth of phone call records for more than 100 Associated Press reporters. This is the largest violation of the First Amendment in modern times and so we now have four scandals in the Obama Administration.

The White House wants Americans to believe the four scandals are all, in one way or another, the rogue acts of insignificant subordinates.

They want us to believe that a few misguided but well-meaning IRS agents in regional offices took the initiative to persecute and harass conservatives in an election year.

They want us to believe that repeated requests for more security at the Benghazi compound were ignored by fourth-tier bureaucrats at the State Department, never making it to the Department’s leadership. That the talking points were altered by unknown analysts at the CIA, rather than senior administration officials as evidence suggests. That the explosive allegations of a senior diplomat are really just the ramblings of a disgruntled employee.

They want us to believe that the White House was completely unaware that the Department of Justice secretly grabbed two months of phone records from Associated Press reporters who cover the administration, in an effort to identify their sources.

And no doubt we will soon discover that Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius’s shakedown of insurance companies for money which Congress refused to appropriate was really the initiative of some unfortunate functionary deep in the bowels of the Department.

But in truth, these scandals are not the random acts of a few bureaucrats who got out of hand.

These scandals are in fact the natural manifestations of Obamaism.

Unaccountable power, untethered from law or the Constitution, and employed for political gain is standard operating procedure in an administration which seeks to make government bigger and bigger. It is the Chicago machine transplanted to the federal government.

And they continue without shame, lying about what they’ve done, then lying about lying, and finally lying about the people who are telling the truth until everyone forgets what they lied about in the first place.

When the President blamed the terrorist attacks in Benghazi on a protest that never happened, anyone who dared challenge the official story was smeared as a crazy extremist or a bitter partisan.

When the Secretary of State vowed to prosecute the creator of an obscure anti-Islam Internet video, those who doubted the explanation were intolerant.

When the U.N. ambassador said on five Sunday talk shows that the violence arose from a spontaneous demonstration against the video, people who questioned the claim were politicizing a tragedy.

It is now obvious to everyone that the Obama Administration was deliberately dishonest. And so the White House tells Americans to forget about it, “Benghazi happened a long time ago.”

The subordinates have been punished. The whistleblowers have been demoted. Move along, nothing to see here.

The administration took the same approach to the IRS scandal. Apparently beginning in 2010, the IRS singled out groups with “tea party” or “patriot" in their name (presumably assuming that groups on the Left don’t describe themselves as “patriotic”), as well as organizations “involved in limiting/expanding Government, educating on the Constitution and Bill of Rights, social economic reform movement[s],” or making statements which “criticize how the country is being run.”

The IRS asked many of these groups to provide lists of their donors, the amount of each donation, and lots of details about the organizations’ activities. Here is an example of one appalling letter from the IRS to a Tea Party group which was targeted.

When the IRS confessed to some of this on Friday in advance of an investigation made public yesterday, it tried to blame low level IRS employees in a Cincinnati office. But it is already being widely reported that senior IRS officials in Washington knew for almost two years that the agency was targeting conservative organizations, even though they testified before Congress more than a year ago and claimed the IRS was doing no such thing.

So they lied to Congress, then lied to the press when caught, and now once again they’re lying about lying. This is the agency which is integral to implementing Obamacare.

How would you like the IRS bureaucrats deciding your health treatments?

Chilling isn't it?

Meanwhile, the White House maintains it had no idea the IRS was abusing power to target the administration’s political enemies, although the Presidential spokesman, Jay Carney, has admitted some people in the White House knew something at a recent press briefing.

Carney's comment begins to move toward Senator Howard Baker's famous Watergate question, "What did you know and when did you know it?"

Speaking of abuses of power, the White House also says it was unaware the Department of Justice secretly obtained two months worth of phone records for more than 100 Associated Press reporters, many of whom cover the Obama administration.

The DOJ is trying to discover the source of unauthorized and damaging national security leaks which informed an AP story on al Qaeda last year.

That is in contrast with the damaging national security leaks which supported the President’s reelection last year: they have not shown much interest in discovering who told the New York Times about President Obama’s “kill list” or his administration’s work on the Stuxnet virus that set back Iran’s nuclear program, or who granted Hollywood filmmakers unprecedented access to officials who divulged details of the bin Laden raid.

Of course, two months worth of phone records are likely to reveal communications with AP sources on hundreds of other stories about the administration in that period of time. But the White House says it is not involved.

Finally, we learned this week that Secretary of Health and Human Services Kathleen Sebelius has been shaking down the health care companies for donations to fund implementation of Obamacare. When Congress refused to appropriate more money to set up the health insurance exchanges, Secretary Sebelius began asking these companies to contribute to Enroll America, a nonprofit organization created to promote Obamacare. It is headed by a former White House official.

As Senator Lamar Alexander said, “Such private fundraising circumvents the constitutional requirement that only Congress may appropriate funds. If the secretary or others in her department are closely coordinating the activities of Enroll America...then those actions may be in violation of the Anti-Deficiency Act.”

Senator Alexander points out the Secretary’s activities are functionally no different from those which led to the Iran-Contra scandal, in which the executive branch attempted to continue supporting a program Congress had not authorized using private donations. Fourteen officials were indicted in Iran-Contra.

Among all these lies and abuses of power from senior administration officials, how can the White House credibly continue to blame low level subordinates? And if he’s not responsible for the State Department, the Department of Justice, the IRS, or the Department of Health and Human Services (all of which were carrying on activities transparently to his political advantage) is President Obama responsible for anything at all in the executive branch?

Tuesday, October 30, 2012

Benghazi Coverup: The Look on The Face Tells All!

The poster below,...a low blow? Not really when you consider:

  • The President not only knew when the Benghazi attacks were happening, but that they were terrorist attacks not a demonstration turned violent,...and he watched the attacks in real time via a Predator video link. 
  • Obama lied and Men Died.  Men died several hours to seven hours after first requesting help that would never come.  Obama lied to the American people on television and through press conferences. 
  • Within 24 hours after the attacks concluded, Obama was in California hob knobbing with fund raisers, then off to New York to be with his rap star buddies.      




Now we have new information contradicting President Obama's statement that he ordered the military to respond. The Secretary of Defense, Director of the CIA and the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs on all together not not getting that order.

Furthermore, Obama has arrested or fired the Africa Command (AFRICOM) Commander General Carter Ham who operational area Libya sat within, AND, has re-called (removed from command) Rear Admiral Charles Gaouette the US Navy Carrier Strike Force Commander off the coast of Libya.

The latest information concerning General Ham and Admiral Gaouette is that that General Ham as head of AFRICOM received the same e-mails the White House received requesting help/support as the attack was taking place. General Ham immediately had a rapid response unit ready and communicated to the Pentagon that he had a unit ready.

General Ham then received the order to stand down. His response was to screw it, he was going to help anyhow. Within 30 seconds to a minute after making the move to respond, his second in command apprehended General Ham and told him that he was now relieved of his command.

The question now is whether the American people will hold to account the chain of command responsible for leaving our people behind, fabricating a politically expedient story, and continuing to sell the now defunct lie(s) even after all of their variations of the story were found to be false and misleading.

A General who made the decision to assist diplomatic and intelligence assets on the ground has been arrested and will likely be retired or worse, while those who ordered the removal of embassy security details and ordered U.S. forces to stand-down are left to go on about their business and likely risk more American lives in the future. source: http://beforeitsnews.com

Additionally, we have learned that Rear Adm. Charles M. Gaouette was replaced a short time after assuming duties whose area of operations just happen to coincide with Libya. So now we have two very senior officers, one a Combatant Commander (AFRICOM Commander GEN Ham), the other in charge of a Carrier Task Force (Rear Adm. Charles M. Gaouette), who would have been able to respond to requests for help from the embassy in Libya, both relieved of their duties.