tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8611810694571930415.post7320168325470147889..comments2024-03-28T13:25:36.836-04:00Comments on the daily howler: BANANA REPUBLIC BENGHAZI: Dowd!<b>bob somerby</b>http://www.blogger.com/profile/02963464534685954436noreply@blogger.comBlogger7125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8611810694571930415.post-29745695348241998122022-01-20T01:21:11.640-05:002022-01-20T01:21:11.640-05:00The Ati student login Prepaid Online Login Page!...The <a href="https://servlogin.com/ati-login-2/" rel="nofollow"> Ati student login </a> Prepaid Online Login Page! Here You Will Be Able To Manage Your Ati student Prepaid Account From Your Device Or Computer Browser.<br />Steven Cohenhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09489437474644545481noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8611810694571930415.post-307388347794742782012-11-29T20:56:05.382-05:002012-11-29T20:56:05.382-05:00Anon 2:35
The CIA put together a memo for public ...Anon 2:35<br /><br />The CIA put together a memo for public consumption on 9/15, 4 days after the Benghazi attacks. The day after that Rice presents this info on <a href="http://blogs.wsj.com/washwire/2012/11/16/flashback-what-susan-rice-said-about-benghazi" rel="nofollow">5 tv shows</a> making the incorrect statement about a demonstration in Benghazi (the looters might well have been mistaken for demonstrators in the moment). At close to the same time THE STORY CONTINUES TO DEVELOP (FOG OF WAR?). and Rice is out of synch with some emerging information (<a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2012/10/22/us/politics/explanation-for-benghazi-attack-under-scrutiny.html?ref=ericschmitt" rel="nofollow">NY Times article</a>). It is obvious that she must have learned this new information <i>after</i> it was reviewed and documented - It would have been presented to her no doubt shortly after the TV appearance a mere 5 days after the event happened. <br /><br />As Tom Ricks <a href="http://www.theatlanticwire.com/politics/2012/11/tom-ricks-fox-tells-fox-it-hyped-benghazi-attack/59314/" rel="nofollow">said on Fox recently</a> - this is pure horse hype which originates in the Republican hope for an October surprise, bubbles up out of the Fox's cauldron and then takes hold of the script driven cognition of our journos, as your TDH incomparably documents every day.<br /><br />To be clear - the media has disappeared the 2 true things she cautiously said 5 times that day; heavily armed extremists attacked the consulate and there is no evidence this was a planned attack and in fact was improvised to leverage the souring mood in the middle east due to the idiotic video. I do have some curiosity about the timing of all this upheaval around the anniversary of attacks on 9/11. The one inaccurate thing she said is not all that important really. <br /><br />I assume there is some 'good' political reasons for Republicans to continue to be paid to not understand this simpler version of the facts, perhaps in the hopes of getting Scott Brown his old job back so he and Elizabeth Warren can go over the fiscal cliff together. The Republicans just <i>love</i> the idea of John Kerry as Secretary of StateAnonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14794619629267168413noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8611810694571930415.post-3003836131659034412012-11-29T18:10:37.785-05:002012-11-29T18:10:37.785-05:00Anon 2:35:
You don't seem capable of reasonin...Anon 2:35:<br /><br />You don't seem capable of reasoning. Not a rare thing, but it is very disheartening to read what you have tosay.<br /><br />AC / MAAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8611810694571930415.post-82080065726695468812012-11-29T17:04:03.417-05:002012-11-29T17:04:03.417-05:00"We know that Rice was told there were no dem..."We know that Rice was told there were no demonstrations in Benghazi: she put out a press release to that effect--Collins wants to know when the FBI told Rice there were no demonstrations. Rice's press release didn't mention when the intelligence assessment evolved."<br /><br />How ridiculous and desperate can you get to clutch onto a phony version of what Rice said. Obviously, that was verified and told to her after September 16. That press statement was issued on November 29.<br /><br />Neither the comical excuses of Republican Senators nor their true beliver trolls have to this date articulated a credible theory of why she or the administration would lie about this, or for that matter, how she misled anybody based on the actual transcripts of the comments she made that day -- that is, the transcripts in their entirety and not with cherry-picked portions that are directly contradicted by the excluded parts. urban legendnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8611810694571930415.post-33248306103146187732012-11-29T16:08:59.951-05:002012-11-29T16:08:59.951-05:00This was oh-so-concerned Susan Collins yesterday o...This was oh-so-concerned Susan Collins yesterday on Hardball. This is after Ms. Collins had sat through multiple closed door classified hearings with all the top intelligence officials up to Petraeus answering questions. <br /><br /><br />MATTHEWS: Let me go back to the facts, as you know them now. Was there a <br />role played by that video, that anti-Islamic video made in California, in <br />this horror story? Did it play a role?<br /><br />COLLINS: It may have inspired some of the people who later entered the <br />compound, but I have not seen evidence that it was the cause of the violent <br />attack on our personnel in Benghazi that cost four Americans their lives. <br />And certainly, Ambassador Rice`s statement on ABC News when she said it was <br />the direct result of the video was not accurate. And today she told me <br />that she did not intend to say what she said on ABC.<br /><br />MATTHEWS: I want you to listen to something. This was in "The New York <br />Times" -- it was in today -- about what we know now of the attacks in <br />Benghazi. This is "The New York Times," and straight reporting.<br /><br />"On-the-ground accounts indicate that Ms. Rice`s description of the attack, <br />though wrong in some respects, was accurate in others. Witnesses to the <br />assault said it was carried out by members of Ansar al Sharia, the militant <br />group, without any warning or protest in retaliation for an American-made <br />video mocking the Prophet Mohammed."<br /><br />Is that the truth, as you know it?<br /><br />COLLINS: It`s partially the truth. When you look at what happened -- and <br />I`ve reviewed tapes, I`ve reviewed classified materials, I`ve sat through <br />hours of briefings -- there were some people who no doubt came onto the <br />compound not only to loot it but because they were angry about the video. <br />But that is not the primary cause of the assault on the compound.<br /><br />mmnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8611810694571930415.post-76405726440822437232012-11-29T14:35:55.868-05:002012-11-29T14:35:55.868-05:00TDH--'She [Collins] wants to know if Rice had ...TDH--'She [Collins] wants to know if Rice had been told that there was no demonstration—although she seems to have no evidence that Rice had been so told."<br /><br />We know that Rice was told there were no demonstrations in Benghazi: she put out a press release to that effect--Collins wants to know when the FBI told Rice there were no demonstrations. Rice's press release didn't mention when the intelligence assessment evolved. <br /><br />Shockingly (to TDH),it seems that Collins would like to know if Rice was flat-out lying. Also, Collins seems not to trust that Rice will tell us herself that she was lying. Probably Dowd doesn't think Rice would do that either. <br /><br />Rice made an accurate statement about two of the men who were killed...but didn't mention that they were far away from the consulate building where Ambassador Stevens was trapped. From someone other than Rice, TDH might label that as misleading--maybe not. For a political opponent find that statement misleading isn't surprising at all. Most people would get the impression that the two men were killed providing security for the Ambassador at the consulate-but they would be wrong. <br /><br /><br /><br />Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8611810694571930415.post-34522967875872305902012-11-29T13:21:48.445-05:002012-11-29T13:21:48.445-05:00It's just amazing, and also depressing, seeing...It's just amazing, and also depressing, seeing this account (and the many, many posts showing this same phenomenon stretching back over days) of how useless the biggest names in "journalism" really are. It's just an avalanche of stupid.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com