Pages Menu
TwitterRssFacebook
Categories Menu

Posted by on Oct 13, 2012 in International, Politics | 25 comments

White House Struggles to Contain New Libya Storm



White House struggles to contain new Libya storm (via AFP)

Mitt Romney has accused Vice President Joe Biden of “doubling down on denial” as the White House struggled to combat a growing storm over the attack on the US consulate in Benghazi. The latest exchanges battered an administration repeatedly thrown onto the defensive by the political reverberations…



Click here for reuse options!
Copyright 2012 The Moderate Voice
  • dduck

    So Jimmny Cricket said, so you don’t like the nose bit, how about you just smile a lot.

    This is a non-partisan question: Why is it those in power (Rep or Dem) don’t realize that the cover up is worse than the crime?

  • This is a non-partisan question: Why is it those in power (Rep or Dem) don’t realize that the cover up is worse than the crime?

    Because, regarding foreign policy, it’s all dirty and nasty. And if we really knew the full measure, we would probably be marching on the White House and Congress due to the crimes (our leaders CAN’T abide that can they). AND since politics is a “game”, Dems and Repubs have to appear better than each other. In regular folks’ lives, a cover up doesn’t have layers and layers of support.

    Anyone that feels that their political guy or gal would be different is drinking the best damn Kool-Aid this side of the Milky Way galaxy. Here’s to Obama or Romney (and their teams) maintaining the Way of the Cover-up. 🙁

  • ShannonLeee

    Major screwup, yes
    Poorly tried to control the narrative, yes.
    Cover up? This ain’t watergate folks.

  • I agree ShannonLeee. This isn’t Watergate at all. But there is still a cover-up (not to Watergate’s magnitude).

    Something tells me that if this wasn’t as election year, there would have been less “covering”, no?

  • dduck

    T got it twice.

  • rudi

    Was there a bungling of some proportions – of course. But this isn’t a criminal act compounded by a bigger criminal act, like Ollie North and Contragate.
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iran%E2%80%93Contra_affair
    If there’s an Ollie North, Fawn Hall and cocaine then we have a story.

    Fawn Hall was hot 😉

  • DORIAN DE WIND, Military Affairs Columnist

    That lying, evil, liberal rag, the New York Times, is at it again:

    The requests [ that the teams of military personnel and State Department security guards who were already on duty be kept in service]were denied, but they were largely focused on extending the tours of security guards at the American Embassy in Tripoli — not at the diplomatic compound in Benghazi, 400 miles away. And State Department officials testified this week during a hearing by the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee that extending the tour of additional guards — a 16-member military security team — through mid-September would not have changed the bloody outcome because they were based in Tripoli, not Benghazi.

    READ MORE HERE

  • DORIAN DE WIND, Military Affairs Columnist

    Hi T.S.

    I agree that “if this wasn’t an election year, there would have been less ‘covering’,” but I hope that you’ll agree with me that if this wasn’t an election year there would be a lot less “investigating” and attacking of the administration in power.

    And that brings me to another point that I hope you’ll agree with me, too.

    There seems to be another issue that each “side” — including mine — gets flustered about: the bringing up of past but similar peccadilloes committed by the other side in order to deflect or mitigate what your own side is doing or has done.

    Rightly or wrongly, in the heat of politics it is done all the time, by both sides. I could cite a dozen or more examples of things allegedly said or written and decisions allegedly made by Obama 5 – 30 years which the opposition brings up when it is convenient.

    Again, I am not excusing one Party or condemning the other Party. I am simply saying that it is a fact — an unfortunate fact — of politics.

    But what disturbs me is when the very same people — and I am not necessarily talking about TMV authors or readers — who would not hesitate, and have not hesitated, to go back in history looking for parallels, get their knickers all in such a frenzied twist when others do it.

    I’ll end my rant by paraphrasing your “Anyone that feels that their political guy or gal would be different is drinking the best damn Kool-Aid this side of the Milky Way galaxy. Here’s to Obama or Romney (and their teams) maintaining that nothing remotely similar to present screw-ups by the other side has ever happened in their own backyard.”

    Peace

  • dduck

    DDW, The NYT article you quoted was from TODAY. They did a lousy job on reporting for three weeks after 9/11, that they must be embarrassed when even their own Maureen Dowd criticized them (Complicity In Duplicity)and putting the CNN story in the Business Section. They are now doing better, and I am glad since this is my go to paper.

  • I’m with you D.W. The election cycle has sharpened things intensely. Folks looking for an angle to win at the expense of problem solving. Benghazi, to me, is a failure of approach than a failure of security. I don’t feel we should have been in Benghazi due to overall instability. But no one had a problem when we set up shop there. In fact, was there any stories about us setting up shop there.

  • SteveinCH

    Benghazi to me isn’t really a failure of approach or of security. It wasn’t wrong to have a presence there nor would a few security guards one way or the other have made a difference.

    It may or may not have been a failure of intelligence in that it may be that we should have known enough to keep Ambassador Stevens away.

    What it most certainly is is somewhere between obfuscation and lying by the administration. VP Biden’s statement that the administration only repeated what they were told by the intelligence community is I think demonstrably false and ultimately will likely be proven to be so.

  • dduck

    By all means, let’s forget the video claim trumpeted by all and where was that from, oh right the “intelligence community” according to Biden and others. Well, it ain’t so, and the administration may not care so much about a security lapse, blame that on middle level people at State, they were worried about their image, hence the video story.
    Ask the intelligence people if you can find them under the bus.

  • SteveinCH

    I don’t know duck, the “intelligence community” has a way of getting its point of view out there. As I said, at some point, the truth will come out on this. I think the intent is simply to delay that as long as possible.

  • dduck

    Perhaps, S, if they think Obama could lose, they might come out sooner.

  • SteveinCH,

    I’m one of those “you will never ‘tame’ the Middle East’s Extremist Jubilee so why bother” types. Which is why approach is everything to me. When visionary leaders rise in the Middle East pointing a new path with the iron hand to pull it off, then I’m all for Middle East policy. Currently no US administration will “win” there.

  • SteveinCH

    T-Steel,

    My point isn’t about engagement per se but rather about having an embassy. I’m not sure we can simply pull out of certain countries and still be effective in the world. Now, maybe in those countries, we should have one location and make it as impregnable as possible but pulling out doesn’t seem like the right answer.

    Not saying I’m right as it’s not provable…just my .02

  • DORIAN DE WIND, Military Affairs Columnist

    “What it most certainly is is somewhere between obfuscation and lying by the administration. VP Biden’s statement that the administration only repeated what they were told by the intelligence community is I think demonstrably false and ultimately will likely be proven to be so.”

    Steve, I am all for heads rolling if anyone lied or obfuscated — I have said that several times before.

    However, shouldn’t we wait until it is “ultimately” proven to be so, before declaring it “demonstrably false?”

    Finally, and I am not being fictitious here, but don’t you or anyone else who has evidence that makes this so demonstrably false have an obligation to make sure such evidence is turned over to the justice system, or at least to some influential Republican authority — perhaps Issa’s Committee?

  • SteveinCH

    Dorian

    Perhaps I was unclear. When I say the statement is demonstrably false I mean the statement can be proven to be false. If I personally had the proof, I would simply say it was false and provide the proof. I do believe it to be at least obfuscation and I believe that the proof will come out over time.

    From my perspective, the notion that the “intelligence community” told the administration that a video let to an RPG and mortar attack on a US target on 9/11 is on its face a pretty unlikely explanation that would require a high burden of proof to be the consensus view of the intelligence community. Thus, it is highly likely that Biden was obfuscating. Over time, we will probably get more facts. Those we have, that intelligence sources were calling it a terrorist attack within 24 hours as an example, suggest again that Biden is not being truthful.

    If you believe differently, I can’t say you are wrong yet. I would suggest there’s little to support your belief as neither logic nor te rumored facts seem to accord with a belief that the Vice President was being truthful

    Take care

  • DORIAN DE WIND, Military Affairs Columnist

    Steve,

    Thanks for your courteous reply.

    I understand where you are coming from. I also don’t have the evidence — except for the President’s and Vice-President’s statements — to vouch for their veracity, but I would like to believe their statements until proven otherwise.

  • DORIAN DE WIND, Military Affairs Columnist

    Steve, just an add-on.

    I was re-reading your comments, what are “rumored facts”?

  • SteveinCH

    Well, for example, it is rumored that intelligence sources were calling this a terrorist attack within 24 hours. I don’t know if that’s true though I suspect it is

  • ShannonLeee

    The WH should take hits on this. If anything, there should be clarity on the issue. The fact that there is a fog over who knew what and when is a serious problem in communication. I still won’t go with “cover up” until there is serious information showing something illegal happened.

    I still see no excuse for not having more security over there. I refuse to accept that the handful of security people we had over there could ever be considered “enough” in a country that volatile. With all the money we send on killing people, we could spend a little more protecting our ambassadors.

  • dduck

    SL, even five times the security probably would not have held AQ off.

  • ShannonLeee

    I think 5 times the security could have safely gotten him out of the building. They did not need to hold the building, just get him out safely. The fact that someone had to leave his side really bothers me. he should have had someone with him the entire time.

  • dduck

    I wish that it were true, but I disagree.

Twitter Auto Publish Powered By : XYZScripts.com