Hawaii Kenya... Obama's birth place

Obama  is the I don't know anything President claims he didn't know anything about the IRS, Benghazi, about the Boston Bomber being Muslim, about the drones killing Americans. He knows NOTHING and he's sticking to that story.  His mothers fake divorce since a marriage certificate cant be found . You cant have a divorce unless you are married. Now his birth certificate. I know it's a moot point now but lets think about all he did that  he claims he  didn't know. Maybe  the reason he says he was born in  Hawaii is that Hawaii is now in Kenya. I bet he knows that but wont admit it.

Uncovered: ‘Obama Phones’ Sold To Buy Drugs

June 18, 2013 by NewsEditor

Project Veritas (James O’Keefe’s organization) investigates a $2.2 billion dollar LifeLine Program (aka ‘Obama Phones’) and finds disturbing evidence of employees saying they can sell the phones to buy heroin and expensive handbags. Contains brief strong language.

An Administration Of Liars Or Incompetents (Perhaps Both)

June 18, 2013 by Richard Larsen

It’s pretty pathetic how many in government service these days provide living proof of the validity of the Peter Principle, which asserts that “Everyone rises to the level of their incompetence.” Either that, or they’re liars.
Starting right at the top, with the President who doesn’t know about anything until he reads about it in the newspaper. He “didn’t know about” the IRS targeting of conservative groups until he learned it from press reports, even though the White House staff knew as early as 2011. The media were also his source for the questionable Associated Press phone record fiasco.
If he really doesn’t know what’s going on in his administration, which is highly unlikely since the politics have his modus operandi fingerprints all over these scandals, then he’s grossly incompetent. If he’s employing this plausible deniability tactic to maintain a distance with the abhorrent actions of his administration, then his moral authority to lead is even more dubious than previously determined.
Former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton bloviated her incompetence in a congressional hearing room, either not knowing (or not willing to acknowledge culpability) with anything regarding the Benghazi 9/11 attack of last year. As an exclamation mark to her obtuseness, she finally lashed out, “What difference does it make?” Well, Madame Secretary, to those who want to know the truth, it makes a lot of difference when those at the highest levels of government, including you, lie to us (and four loyal Americans are dead because of it!)
Jay Carney, the White House Press Secretary, while proving adept at covering for his boss, has lost all credibility with the White House press corps by his obfuscation and mendacity when pressed on recent administration scandals. And with regard to the Benghazi incident, obviously wanting to move on with a cavalier “there’s nothing to see here” kind of attitude, he claims, “That was a long time ago.” Really! Nine months is a long time ago? So if you lied nine months ago, that’s not supposed to matter when we have four dead, including an ambassador?
And we can’t overlook the utter incompetence of the Internal Revenue Service leadership. Former IRS Commissioner Steven Miller knew for over a year that the “Advocacy Group” in Cincinnati had been targeting conservative groups, disallowing tax-exempt status. He claimed to have initiated an investigation, but knew nothing about the results of the investigation or who was running it.

Miller’s former IRS boss, Douglas Shulman, had twice testified to Congress that the conservative group targeting was not happening. And when he was finally confronted with the facts that it was indeed occurring, he claimed ignorance as his defense. And when queried by congressmen why he visited the White House 157 times, more than any cabinet member, while his predecessor had only visited once, he imperiously responded that the only visit he could recall was taking his kids to the Easter egg roll. Seriously, where do they find these guys?
Lois Lerner, the head of the IRS non-profit review division, is perhaps the only one from the administration who seems to have any semblance of integrity. At least she had the scruples to plead the 5^th so as to not incriminate herself, although she likely then committed perjury before the congressional committee when she pompously declared, “I have done nothing wrong.” So much for her semblance of integrity!
Heck, IRS leadership can’t even muster the receipts for their conferences and lavish shindigs, including a $4 million “conference” in Las Vegas where they made videos of line-dancing IRS employees and featured a “Star Trek” video production that would embarrass a high school wannabe movie maker. Next time you meet with the IRS, tell them you can’t seem to locate your receipts and see how well that goes over with them!
And just this past week, FBI Director Robert Mueller proved his incompetence as he could not name the lead investigator in the IRS scandal. The investigation was purportedly ordered by his boss (the president) over a month ago; and the head of the agency knows nothing of the status of the investigation, or who’s conducting it!
The only thing anyone in this administration seems capable of accepting responsibility for, or knowing anything about, is the one program run by Washington that seems to be working and working well: the NSA data mining of American citizens. And regrettably, it took a whistle-blowing contractor to expose the extent of that “big brother” program that’s monitoring every citizen’s phone calls, emails, and digital footprint, including social media.
Either the entire administration is clueless, incompetent, and refuses to accept responsibility for anything; or they’re all liars. Either way, we clearly have an out-of-control government, too large and unwieldy to manage, and a gaggle of politicians and bureaucrats too incompetent or dishonest to run it.

AP award winning columnist Richard Larsen is President of Larsen Financial, a brokerage and financial planning firm in Pocatello, Idaho, and is a graduate of Idaho State University with degrees in Political Science and History and former member of the Idaho State Journal Editorial Board.  He can be reached at rlarsenen@cableone.net.

June 18, 2013 by Richard Larsen

Documented Obama's Lies I heard through the grape vine Obama says and he calls himself a President of what Grapes

Today on the radio show, Glenn spent two hours going through the documented lies of the Obama administration. He kicked things off with the lies that came at the very beginning, tackling Obama’s promises on the campaign trail and the distortions about his past.
“If you catch them in an early lie, they learn their lesson and so they don’t continue to do it. But if you don’t call them on early lies, they only get worse, bigger, and more dangerous. So let’s start with the early lie,” Glenn said.
Lie 1: PRESIDENT OBAMA: The Kennedys decided we’re going to do an airlift. We’re going to go out to Africa and we’re going to start bringing young Africans over to this country and give them scholarships to study so that they can learn what a wonderful country America is. And this young man named Barack Obama got one of those tickets and came over to this country.
Truth: His father came to America at least a year before this program started.

Lie 2: President Obama: There’s some good craziness going on because they looked at each other and they decided we know that in the world as it has been, it might not be possible for us to get together and have a child. But something’s stirring across the country because of what happened in Selma, Alabama because some folks are willing to march across a bridge. And so they got together and Barack Obama, Jr. was born.
Truth: He was born four years before the Selma march.

Lie 3: President Obama: It’s the founding ideals that the flag draped over my father’s coffin stand for.Truth: His father was buried in Kenya, never served in the U.S. military. Which flag draped his father’s coffin? And what ideals does the flag that draped his father’s coffin in Kenya stand for?

Lie 4: President Obama promised that lobbyists would not be a part of his administration or have the influence in Washington they had previously

Truth: He broke that promise three days later. CNN reported, “Just this weekend The New York times published a list of names — a rather long list of names of people — who are working on Obama’s transition team or who have accepted jobs in his White House who are either former lobbyists or who have close ties to lobbyists.”

Lie 5: President Obama: “And Jerusalem will remain the capital of Israel and it must remain undivided.”
Truth: Obama later said, “This was an example where we had some poor phrasing in the speech and we immediately tried to correct the interpretation that was given. The point we were simply making was, is that we don’t want barbed wire running through Jerusalem.”

Lie 6: President Obama: I believe in the Constitution and I will obey the Constitution of the United States. We’re not going to use signing statements as a way of doing an end run around congress.

Truth: He’s used signing statements over 20 times.

The Documented Obama Lies: Healthcare

 

Glenn spent two hours today going through the lies told by the Obama administration over the past few years, and some of the biggest whoppers involved healthcare.
“Virtually everything we told you about the healthcare bill now has proven to be true,” Glenn said. ”And nearly everything they told you was a lie.”

Lie 1: PRESIDENT OBAMA: For my mother to die of cancer at the age of 53 and have to spend her last months of her life in the hospital rooming arguing with insurance companies because they are saying that this may be a preexisting condition and they don’t have to pay her treatment, there’s something fundamentally wrong about that.
Truth: Glenn explained, “Well, what would be fundamentally wrong is the story itself. His mother was never challenged by her insurance company because of preexisting conditions. There was some concern over her disability claim. She was treated. And when she finally came in for treatment, it was covered by insurance. By the way, she continued to receive her $85,000 a year salary plus housing and car from her employer. But don’t mention any of that because if you do, you’re a racist. Shameless to use your mother’s illness, to lie about your mother’s circumstances to gain political advantage.”

Lie 2: PRESIDENT OBAMA: If you have insurance that you like, then you will be able to keep that insurance. If you’ve got a doctor that you like, you will be able to keep your doctor. Nobody is trying to change what works.
Truth: Even if you like your plan, you may not be able to keep it.

Lie 3: President Obama: Nobody is talking about some government takeover of healthcare.

Lie 4: President Obama: For us to say that you’ve got to take a responsibility to get health insurance is absolutely not a tax increase.
Truth: Supreme Court ruled Obamacare was legal as a tax.

The Documented Lies: Benghazi – What difference does it make?

Hillary Clinton famously tried to brush off the truth by screeching out ‘what difference does it make?’ during a Congressional hearing. Hillary clearly gambled that the media also doesn’t care about the truth, and as it turns out she was mostly right. She’s still in line for the 2016 nomination even though she oversaw the death of four Americans and said she didn’t care about it. But that’s just the beginning of the Benghazi lies…
Lie: The attacks were the result of a spontaneous protest in response to a Youtube Video.
Examples:

Susan Rice: Our current best assessment based on the information that we have at present is that, in fact, what this began as was a spontaneous, not a premeditated response to what had transpired in Cairo.
President Obama: What we do know is that the natural protests that arose because of the outrage over the video were used as an excuse by extremists to see if they can also directly harm U.S. interests.
Jay Carney: It is in response not to United States policy, not to obviously the administration, not to the American people. It is in response to a video, a film.

Truth: The attacks were a premeditated terror attack that had nothing to do with a YouTube video.

Rep. Gowdy said, “For almost a year there was an escalating pattern of violence directed toward the United States and other Western targets in Libya. Attacks on the consulate and Benghazi, attacks and assassination attempts on the British ambassador, attacks on the international Red Cross, attacks on courthouses, judges assassinated, culminating on September the 11th and the murder of four Americans including our ambassador.
”

The Documented Obama Lies: Fast and Furious

The Federal government knowingly and purposefully walked guns into the hands of Mexican drug cartels as part of a scheme to uncover and bust the cartels. Later the guns we sent over were used to kill our own border patrol agents, and now the administration is in full lie mode. Glenn had more on radio in the clip above.
Lie 1: Fast and Furious started under the Obama administration and didn’t start in Washington DC but in the field. President Obama: First of all, I think it’s important for us to understand that the Fast and Furious program was a field‑initiated program begun under the previous administration.
Truth: The program was started in October 2009 and the strategy was decided at the Department of Justice in Washington DC.
More damning audio and quotes can be found in the clip at the top of this page.

Bush Made Us Do It

Lets go back in History 

 Richard Nixon said

 I am not a Crook

Here is Obama and Holder with their hands on their heartless chests Stating 

 WE SWEAR  IT WASN'T  US!

We aint saying nothing !!!!

Bush Made Us Do It

Hand on heart, it wasn't us! Obama and his Attorney General stand side by side in blaming others for three scandals engulfing the White House

• Department of Justice seized Associated Press phone records without notifying journalists or their editors, and Holder claims to know nothing
• It took the FBI fully 18 days to arrive in Benghazi after the terror attack on a U.S. diplomatic outpost there, according to a senior diplomat
• Attorney general is catching flak for not acting on tips from foreign governments about the accused Boston bomber Tamerlan Tsarnaev
• Holder won't commit to criminal penalties for IRS agents who targeted conservative groups for extra scrutiny and intrusive inquisitions

By DAVID MARTOSKO IN WASHINGTON

PUBLISHED: 13:37 EST, 15 May 2013 | UPDATED: 16:50 EST, 15 May 2013

 U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder today told the House Judiciary Committee he 'knew nothing' about his agency's possession of two months' worth of phone records from reporters and editors of the Associated Press. 

Like White House Press Secretary Jay Carney a day earlier, he professed to know little or nothing about the case.

California Democratic Rep. Zoe Lofgren told Holder she was frustrated by his Department of Justice's seizure of the phone records, and insisted that notifying the AP could not have threatened the integrity of the investigation into a leak of classified information to a reporter.

'This is both an ongoing matter, and an ongoing matter about which I know nothing,' Holder replied

Bosom buddies: President Barack Obama (L) and Eric Holder (C) attended the National Peace Officers Memorial Service on Wednesday just hours before Holder would tell a hostile congressional panel that 'he knew nothing'

Laughing it off: both Obama and Holder have gone to great lengths to distance themselves from the scandals lapping at the White house door

‘It seems to me that the damage to a free press has been substantial,' Lofgren said.

The DoJ is also investigating the Internal Revenue Service for targeting conservative groups for special scrutiny after the applied for tax-exempt status.

The hearing came barely a half-day after President Obama responded to a report from the IRS Inspector General, which largely exonerated the IRS’s upper management. 

But Obama’s statement seemed calculated to lay the blame at the IRS’s feet, insulating the White House from reporters’ future questions about responsibility and accountability.

Obama called the IRS’s conduct ‘intolerable and inexcusable,’ saying in a statement that ‘[t]he IRS must apply the law in a fair and impartial way, and its employees must act with utmost integrity. This report shows that some of its employees failed that test.’

‘Regardless of how this conduct was allowed to take place,’ Obama said, ‘the bottom line is, it was wrong.’

The Inspector General’s report found that IRS employees in Cincinnati, Ohio, wrongly targeted conservative groups by asking inappropriate questions and justifying them mas part of an investigation into whether the organizations were trying to hide political advocacy behind a façade of public charity.

Back off: Holder told the Republican-controlled committee: ''I am not familiar with the reasons why [the case was pursued] in the way that it was, because I¿m simply not a part of the case'

Anger: Holder was furious at the hearing that an RNC member had demanded his resignation

The FBI's response to the Sept. 2012 terror attack on the U.S. Consulate in Benghazi, Libya is also still a hot potato inside the beltway. 

And questions still remain, Republicans said, about federal law enforcement's failure to prevent the Boston Marathon bombing that claimed three lives on April 15.

Virginia Republican Rep. Bob Goodlatte, the committee's chairman, asked Holder about the phone records case, in which the DOJ obtained a subpoena for Associated Press phone records in order to investigate the source of a leak of classified information.

Holder reminded the panel that he had recused himself from that investigation, delegating it instead to an assistant attorney general. And he bristled at the call for his removal issued by Republican National Committee chairman Reince Priebus only yesterday.

'I was not the person who was involved in that decision,' Holder explained. 'The head of the RNC called for my resignation in spite of the fact that I was not the person who was involved in that decision.'

'I am not familiar with the reasons why [the case was pursued] in the way that it was, because I’m simply not a part of the case', he added.

The FBI, not the State Department or the Department of Homeland Security, was designated as the lead investigative agency after terrorists attacked the U.S. Consulate in Benghazi, Libya. The State Department's second-in-command in Libya at the time of the attack, Greg Hicks, testified in an earlier hearing that it took 'maybe 18 days to get the FBI team to Benghazi' for an investigation to commence

Wisconsin Republican Rep. Jim Sensenbrenner reminded Holder that federal regulations required his agency to inform the press before it seized phone records. 

Asked why that never happened, Holder replied, 'That I don't know. There are exceptions if the integrity of the investigation would be impacted. I don't know why that didn't happen.'

But he defended his staff, despite not knowing the content of their investigation, or where it has led them.

 

More...

• IRS questioning included demands for Facebook postings, the books they are reading and even what they're THINKING, report reveals
• A THIRD of committees in House of Representatives are now investigating Obama administration
• Obama condemns IRS targeting of conservative groups as 'intolerable and inexcusable' as he fights to control mounting scandal
• Eric Holder points finger at his DEPUTY who secretly obtained journalist's phone records as Obama is forced to say he has 'confidence' in the Attorney General
• CNN accuses ABC of falsely reporting White House collaboration with State Department in Benghazi 'cover up'

'I have faith in the people who actually were responsible for this case, that they were aware of the rules and that they followed them,' Holder said, 'but I don’t have a factual basis to answer the questions that you have asked, because I was recused.'

In particular, Holder said he was 'not familiar' with how the DOJ subpoena was written, or how it was executed.

White House Press Secretary Jay Carney took questions from reporters while Holder faced a grilling at the other end of Pennsylvania Avenue. Like Holder, Carney has professed that the White House knows little about the IRS scandal or the AP phone-record seizures, insisting that the president found out about both matters from published news accounts

Democrats seemed equally bothered by the intrusion of government agencies into journalists' press freedoms. Rep. John Conyers, a Michigan Democrat and the committee's ranking opposition member, said he was 'deeply troubled by the notion that our government would secretly pursue such a broad array of media phone records over such a long period of time.'

Goodlatte opened his questioning by pressing Holder on the DOJ's performance before and after the Boston bombing. The Russian government warned the U.S. about accused bomber Tamerlan Tsarnaev, who was killed days after the bombing in a police shootout. 

Holder suggested in his testimony that it was other nations, not America's law enforcement officials, who should have done more.

'I'm not at all certain,' he offered, 'that all of the requests that were made to a foreign country by the FBI were replied to in an adequate manner.'

On Benghazi, Holder offered a cryptic promise. Federal authorities, he said, have 'taken steps that are definitive and concrete. ... We are prepared to reveal shortly what we have done.'

The attorney general did not elaborate.

The Justice Department secretly obtained telephone records from April and May of 2012 of reporters and editors for the AP, in what the news outlet's top executive called a 'massive and unprecedented intrusion' into how news organizations work

Notably, Holder's prepared testimony didn't address either the IRS investigation or the AP phone records case, likely because neither was yet a political football  by the time his statement was drafted. Congressional testimony given by high-ranking political appointees typically goes through a lengthy vetting process that can take days or even weeks.

But under questioning from Texas Republican Rep. Lamar Smith, Holder predicted that the DOJ's investigation into the IRS could involve 'potential civil rights law[breaking],' as well as 'false statement violations.' 

Smith called the IRS's targeting of tea party groups and other conservative applicants for tax-exempt status 'a threat to our democracy.'

Democratic Rep. Bobby Scott of Virginia also asked about the IRS investigation, suggesting that employees who targeted tea party groups could face felony charges.

Holder said he wasn't so sure, although the conduct involved was 'outrageous.' 

'To the extent that there are enforcement gaps that we find, we will let this committee know,' he said.

HOLDER'S HEADACHES

BENGHAZI

It allegedly took the FBI 18 days to arrive and set up an investigation after terrorists laid waste to the U.S. Consulate in Benghazi, Libya, leaving four Americans dead. And few answers have been forthcoming about why the Obama administration has been so tight-lipped about the subsequent investigation. Holder likely knows everything, and Republicans on Capitol Hill want that information. 

AP PHONE RECORDS

The DOJ secretly obtained the phone records of Associated Press journalists in at least three cities without informing the news bureau beforehand, in order to learn who leaked information about a classified CIA operation. But federal regulations generally require notification of journalists before the government invades their First Amendment freedoms. Holder claims to know nothing, saying that he recused himself from the investigation since he himself was interviewed in connection with the probe. But that begs the question of how anyone at the top levels of the DOJ could investigate the leak without an apparent conflict of interest, since many if not all of them have security clearances sufficient to see the material that was leaked.

IRS TARGETING TEA PARTY

The Internal Revenue Service has admitted running a longstanding program that targeted right-wing groups - including those aligned with the politically successful tea party - for extra scrutiny, through delay tactics and intrusive mandatory questionnaires. Holder has announced an investigation, but is tight-lipped about whether he suspects laws were broken. One Republican senator has called for the IRS commissioner to be fired, while the speaker of the House has asked aloud whether anyone is ‘going to jail.’ Since that ‘anyone’ is likely to be a political appointee, Republicans are frustrated at Holder’s coy answers and his claim to know little at this early point in the investigation.

BOSTON BOMBING

Holder and other cabinet officials have been criticized for failing to act on warnings from Russia, and perhaps other nations, about the accused Boston bomber Tamerlan Tsarnaev. And the FBI was lambasted for showing photos of the Tsarnaev brothers publicly instead of asking the Islamic Society of Boston to identify them. Once they saw their photos on television, the brothers ran – shooting a police officer to death in the process.

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2325076/Eric-Holder-faces-congressional-grilling-IRS-investigation-Boston-bombing-Benghazi-spying-journalists-phone-records-scandal-fever-sweeps-Washington.html#ixzz2TPX2SGCW
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook

  

How do you impeach an illegally sitting President? Just pick him up and throw him and Biden out!

How do you impeach an illegally sitting President?  Just pick him up and throw him and Biden out!

Republican senator and liberal columnist hint at impeachment for Obama over Benghazi 'cover-up' 

• Sen. Jim Inhofe: 'People may be starting to use the "I"-word before too long'
• Daily Beast columnist Michael Tomasky: Benghazi 'a potential impeachment issue as long as the Republicans are in control of the House'
• Fox News host and former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee: Obama 'will not serve out his full term'

By DAVID MARTOSKO IN WASHINGTON

PUBLISHED: 14:26 EST, 10 May 2013 | UPDATED: 14:33 EST, 10 May 2013

 The specter of impeachment proceedings against President Barack Obama over an alleged Benghazi cover-up has been raised for the first time, with a conservative senator and a liberal political columnist both hinting that 'the "I" word' could be in play.

Oklahoma Republican Sen. Jim Inhofe said Thursday on the Rusty Humphries radio show that what he called the 'greatest cover-up in American history' could soon enter impeachment territory.

'People may be starting to use the "I"-word before too long,” Inhofe said.

'The I-word meaning impeachment?' Humphries, the host, asked.

'Yeah,' Inhofe replied.

SCROLL DOWN FOR VIDEO

The Hill first reported on Inhofe's comments, which came less than a day before Newsweek columnist Michael Tomasky followed suit.

During Friday's airing of the MSNBC program Now, Tomasky responded to the suggestion that Republicans' political knives are out for former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton in advance of the 2016 presidential election - by saying that the episode could reach into the Oval Office and snare its current occupant.

Benghazi hearings, he said, could point to 'that word that starts with "I."' 

'It becomes a potential impeachment issue,' Tomasky said, 'as long as the Republicans are in control of the House.'

An Obama impeachment? Inhofe (L) and Tomasky (R) are suggesting that it could come over the fast-growing Benghazi scandal  

 

The impeachment of a sitting president is rare, and would originate with charges brought in the Republican-dominated House of Representatives. The Senate, however, votes on whether to convict an impeached president. 

That body is currently controlled by Democrats, and the status of its majority is likely to be a hotly contested issue in the 2014 mid-term election.

President Bill Clinton's impeachment was stopped in a Democratic-controlled senate, which refused to convict him on charges that he lied, while under oath, about his affair with a White House intern.

The Hill noted that Fox News Channel host and former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee has predicted that Obama 'will not serve out his full term' because of Benghazi-related accusations.

ABC News uncovered 12 versions of the infamous Benghazi talking points, suggesting that the Obama administration was more involved with editing them than it has admitted

'This is not good for the White House right now,' said MSNBC host Luke Russert (C). Buzzfeed's Ben Smith (R) agreed that it doesn't look good, and Michael Tomasky of The Daily Beast (second from R) raised 'the "I" word'

ABC News revealed Friday that a set of public talking points on the Sept. 11, 2012 attack on the U.S. Consulate in Benghazi, Libya was edited 12 times, and ultimately presented a false reading of the terror attack.

State Department personnel had a hand in proposing those revisions, emails leaked to ABC show, despite the White House's insistence that its political appointees had no 'substantive' role in changing the official Benghazi story.

Ultimately UN Ambassador Susan Rice, then-Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, and President Obama all referred publicly to the terror attack as the result of a spontaneous protest sparked by an anti-Islam YouTube video.

'Here's what happened,' Obama told David Letterman on his CBS nighttime talk show on Sept. 18.

'You had a video that was released by somebody who lives here, sort of a shadowy character who made an extremely offensive video directed at Mohammed and Islam, making fun of the Prophet Mohammed,' the president said.

'And so this caused great offense in much of the Muslim world. But what also happened, extremists and terrorists used this as an excuse to attack a variety of our embassies, including the one - the consulate in Libya.'

That story turned out to be false. 

State Department spokeswoman Victoria Nuland's emails show that the agency, then headed by Hillary Clinton, had a direct hand in altering the official story on the Benghazi terror attack

Then-Secretary of State Hillary Clinton testified before Congress that it didn't matter whether the Benghazi assault was a terrorist attack or the result of a protest. 'What difference, at this point, does it make?' she asked

A White House press briefing scheduled for 12:30 p.m. Friday was rescheduled for 1:45 after Press Secretary Jay Carney opted instead to hold a private, off-the-record briefing with 14 journalists. 

The briefing was later rescheduled again, for 3:15 p.m. President Obama was scheduled to deliver remarks about the Affordable Health Care Act in the East Room of the White House at 2:40 p.m.

The briefing, when it occurs, is likely to see an explosion of new questions about Benghazi, but it will be delayed enough to push the resulting news into what journalists call the 'Friday black hole' - the final hours before the weekend when Americans least pay attention to current events.

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2322722/Republican-senator-liberal-columnist-hint-impeachment-Obama-Benghazi-terrorism-cover-scandal.html#ixzz2SxScZdJV
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook
 

The Blood Is On your Hands Obama Not anyone else

I am sure that Bush is feeling left out on this one Obama and his administration are blaming Romney for Benghazu. Obama refusing to admit it was his fault that Americans died from his neglect and needs to make someone the scapegoat like Hitler blamed all the Jews for depression. Some of the Right wing radical Christian Conservatives are doing the same thing with Obama, But in my last few Blogs I already explained that Jews are not the majority and neither is white Christian America.

The Blood Is On your Hands Muslim  Obama Not anyone else

Any way lets get back on the subject. It's all Romneys fault and for once it's not Bush. Huummmmm ......

White House spokesman feels Benghazi pressure, blames Mitt Romney for taking 'political advantage of these deaths'

• Pressure mounts as a Republican senator and a liberal columnist both road-test the word 'impeachment'
• Carney insists the administration's Benghazi talking points memo reflected the CIA's best intelligence
• An early CIA draft says 'we do know' an al-Qaeda influenced group participated in the attack, but the official version omitted terror references
• Key question: Did political appointees direct the CIA to change its tune so the president wouldn't look soft on terror just weeks before the election?

 By DAVID MARTOSKO IN WASHINGTON

PUBLISHED: 17:51 EST, 10 May 2013 | UPDATED: 17:56 EST, 10 May 2013

 White House Press Secretary Jay Carney stumbled Friday in a routine press briefing that turned ugly, when reporters asked why a CIA-approved set of talking points about last year's terror attack on a U.S. diplomatic outpost in Benghazi, Libya were edited 12 times - seemingly with the influence of Obama administration political appointees.

Carney took swipes at Republicans and faced hostile questions from a press corps that grew impatient with the government's answers to questions about the Sept 11, 2012 deadly, al-Qaeda-inspired mayhem.

Many reporters were equally impatient with the White House Press Office, which rescheduled the regular daily briefing twice, first holding instead a closed-door background session with 14 selected reporters.

While Carney initially promised that he would remain in the briefing room 'as long as you want' to answer reporters' questions, he left abruptly with many hands still in the air.

SCROLL DOWN FOR VIDEO

White House spokesman Jay Carney denied Republican accusations of a cover-up in last year's deadly attack in Libya, trying to defuse a renewed political controversy after 12 drafts of a talking-points memo emerged, showing an attempt to omit references to Islamic terrorism in the midst of an election capmaign

Carney slammed Republican 2012 presidential candidate and former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney, whom he said 'put out a press release to try and take political advantage of these deaths' -- and then corrected himself: 'of the attack in Benghazi'

Terrorists destroyed the U.S. diplomatic outpost in Benghazi during the 2012 presidential campaign, leading Republicans to suggest that downplaying the impact of active terrorists in Libya was a tactic to deflect concerns that the president was weak on Islamic terrorism.

• 
   

Responding to questions about whether the Obama administration sought to avoid those political consequences, Carney took a shot at Mitt Romney, the president's opponent.

The former Republican governor of Massachusetts, he said, 'put out a press release to try and take political advantage of these deaths.'

Carney quickly corrected himself: 'Of the attack in Benghazi.'

At issue is language the CIA prepared for the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence. Its initial draft held, in part, that 'We believe ... the attacks in Benghazi were spontaneously inspired ... [but] we do know that Islamic extremists with ties to al Qa'ida participated in the attack.'

Twelve revisions later, and after emailed input from State Department spokeswoman Victoria Nuland, the final version issued Sept. 15 read that 'currently available information suggests that the demonstrations in Benghazi were spontaneously inspired ... [but] there are indications that extremists participated in the violent demonstrations.'

All mentions of Islamic terrorism, al-Qaeda and the 'attack' itself were scrubbed from the talking points by the time US Secretary Susan Rice blamed the deadly incident on an anti-Islam YouTube video, during five talk show appearances on Sept. 16.

 

An Obama impeachment? Sen. Jim Inhofe (L) and Daily Beast columnist Michael Tomasky (R) are suggesting that the Benghazi scandal could lead there 

Carney held Friday to his previous statements, insisting that the intelligence community was solely responsible for the substantive edits.

'The CIA, in this case deputy director of the CIA ... issued a set of talking points on that Saturday morning,' Carney said, 'and those talking points were disseminated. And the only edit made by the White House or the State Department ... was a change in referring to the facility that was attacked as a "consulate" -- because it was not a consulate -- to "diplomatic post."'

But reporters questioned Carney's parsing of words, asking if the State Department's influence was felt by the CIA, which then adapted its talking points to suit political appointees.

Carney said the State Department was included in the working group that edited the CIA's draft, 'since it was a State Department facility that was attacked.'

Carney accused unnamed Republicans of leaking a series of emails to ABC News on Friday. Those communications, the network reported, spell out the trail of edits across 12 separate versions of the talking points.

The White House, he said, provided the emails in question to the U.S. Senate months ago, in response to a request related to the confirmation of the incoming CIA director, John Brennan.

'The administration took the rather extraordinary step of providing those emails' to senators 'in late February and through March,' Carney said. Senate Republicans voted to confirm Brennan after seeing 'all of these emails which, of course, now they've leaked to reporters.'

 Carney held Friday to his previous statements, insisting that the intelligence community was solely responsible for the substantive edits.

'The CIA, in this case deputy director of the CIA ... issued a set of talking points on that Saturday morning,' Carney said, 'and those talking points were disseminated. And the only edit made by the White House or the State Department ... was a change in referring to the facility that was attacked as a "consulate" -- because it was not a consulate -- to "diplomatic post."'

But reporters questioned Carney's parsing of words, asking if the State Department's influence was felt by the CIA, which then adapted its talking points to suit political appointees.

Carney said the State Department was included in the working group that edited the CIA's draft, 'since it was a State Department facility that was attacked.'

Carney accused unnamed Republicans of leaking a series of emails to ABC News on Friday. Those communications, the network reported, spell out the trail of edits across 12 separate versions of the talking points.

The White House, he said, provided the emails in question to the U.S. Senate months ago, in response to a request related to the confirmation of the incoming CIA director, John Brennan.

'The administration took the rather extraordinary step of providing those emails' to senators 'in late February and through March,' Carney said. Senate Republicans voted to confirm Brennan after seeing 'all of these emails which, of course, now they've leaked to reporters.'

State Department spokeswoman Victoria Nuland's emails show that the agency, then headed by Hillary Clinton, had a direct hand in suggesting alterations to the official story on the Benghazi terror attack

ABC News uncovered 12 versions of the infamous Benghazi talking points, along with emails suggesting that Nuland - then Hillary Clinton's chief spokesperson - was chiefly interested in political considerations less than two months before the presidential elections

Although Republicans have called on the White House to release unclassified versions of all internal administration emails related to what they term a Benghazi 'cover-up,' Carney said the administration would not comply.

'Internal deliberations are generally protected information,' he noted.

The Freedom of Information Act includes a list of nine exceptions to government transparency rules, including the provision that 'a privileged inter-agency or intra-agency memorandum or letter' need not be disclosed.

But it's unclear whether that rule applies to Congress, or whether Republicans on Capitol Hill will drop the now-intensely politicized issue. Four Americans perished in the terror attack on Benghazi, including then-Ambassador to Libya Chris Stevens.

He conceded that one feature of the talking points, its claim that spontaneous demonstrations preceded the Benghazi terror attack, turned out to be flawed. But reporters focused more on sins of omission on which the White House is now referring questions to the CIA.

'You should direct those questions to the intelligence community,' Carney said after one journalist asked whether the CIA's first draft - which included references to al-Qaeda - was accurate before it was edited.

These bloodstains at the main gate of the U.S. consulate in Benghazi, Libya are believed to belong to an American staff member. Four U.S. personnel, including ambassador Chris Stevens, died in the Sept. 11, 2012 terror attack

The normally unflappable Jay Carney seemed to struggle Friday to answer questions, in a hostile briefing that was delayed twice and pushed near the end of the work day when most of the day's news cycle was over

It's an open question whether the White House will be able to rest blame for the ultimately flawed talking points with intelligence agencies despite the State Department's now-documented influence over the process.

But one reporter was heard in the press briefing room after Carney departed, speculating about applying the press secretary's standard of responsibility to his cooking.

'So if I have this soup recipe that I know is great, and my wife tells me over and over to put different things into it instead, and I do what she asks, and then it turns out awful, whose fault is it?' the reporter, who asked not to be named, said.

Indeed, Carney said 'No' when asked if he could deny that the second and subsequent CIA drafts of the Benghazi talking points came after input from the State Department.

But 'these are talking points,' he reflected. 'Not policy.'

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2322823/White-House-spokesman-feels-Benghazi-pressure-blames-Mitt-Romney-taking-political-advantage-deaths.html#ixzz2SxNnhkDO
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook

BENGHAZI ATTACK INVESTIGATION

Benghazi: Democratic Party lawmakers slamming Obama administration (Video)

BENGHAZI ATTACK INVESTIGATION

http://www.examiner.com/article/benghazi-democratic-party-lawmakers-slamming-obama-administration

MAY 6, 2013BY: JIM KOURI

As the day for three Benghazi"whistleblowers" to testify before a congressional panel draws near, President Barack Obama's fellow Democrats on Capitol Hill slammed him with statements on Sunday's national news shows that were highly critical of the now famous Benghazi massacre talking points that were allegedly revised to mislead the American people.

While GOP lawmakers have been heaping one accusation on top of another since the terrorist attack on Sept.11, 2012, Obama's Democrats on Sunday suddenly distanced themselves from the Obama administration’s explanation of the Benghazi, Libya, attacks in the midst of more evidence being gathered by investigators in Congress and the news media, including Internet bloggers.

or example, it was discovered that the original CIA talking points memorandum contained words and phrases such as "Islamists, Islamic extremists, and al-Qaeda." But when Obama dispatched Susan Rice, U.S. ambassador to the United Nations, to appear on Sunday news shows she blamed the the attacks on demonstrators angry over an obscure anti-Islamic video posted on the Internet.

According to Fox News Channel, several Democratic lawmakers appeared Sunday morning and made biting comments regarding Benghazi and the Obama administration:

“Well, it was scrubbed,” Massachusetts Democratic Rep. Steve Lynch told “Fox News Sunday.” “It was totally inaccurate. There's no excuse for that. It was false information. And what they try to do is harmonize what happened in Benghazi with what happened everywhere else across the Middle East.”

Lynch also acknowledged the talking points were likely revised to reflect President Obama’s claim – with his re-election bid in the balance -- that “Al Qaeda is on the run.”

 Maryland Democratic Rep. Dutch Ruppersberger, the top Democrat on the House Intelligence Committee, also acknowledged Sunday the facts as told by Rice were wrong.

“At the time, as it turns out” the information was incorrect, he said on CBS’ “Face the Nation”

Ruppersberger, who was briefed by the CIA about the attacks in immediate aftermath, asked agency officials what congressional leaders could tell the public, according to The Weekly Standard story.

On Sunday, he also said he welcomes a House Oversight and Government Affairs Committee hearing this week in which Greg Hicks, the deputy chief of mission at the U.S. Embassy in Libya at the time of attacks, is expected to say Rice said the attacks didn’t appear to be “pre-meditated or pre-planned,” despite having information suggesting they were.

“That's what an investigation is about,” Ruppersberger told CBS. “Let's get the facts.”

Appearing on several TV news shows, Rep. Mike Kelly (R-Penn.) had blasted President Barack Obama and his administration, including the CIA director, for playing politics with the terrorist attack on the U.S. consulate in Benghazi, Libya, that left four Americans, including U.S. ambassador Chris Stevens, dead.

Complaining about the lack of candor emanating from the Obama White House the State Department, the Defense Department and the CIA, Kelly said, "I am appalled by the dereliction of duty that’s taken place by this administration. We’ve got to get to the bottom of this and we’ve got to get it fixed.” Kelly, a first-term congressman, serves on the House Foreign Affairs Committee.

Rep. Kelly claims that in a May 3, 2012, email, the State Department denied a request by a group of Special Forces assigned to protect the U.S. embassy in Libya to continue their use of a DC- 3 airplane for security operations throughout the country. The subject line of the email, on which slain Ambassador Chris Stevens was copied, read: “Termination of Tripoli DC-3 Support.”

"Four days later, on May 7, the State Department authorized the U.S. embassy in Vienna to purchase a $108,000 electric vehicle charging station for the embassy motor pool’s new Chevrolet Volts. The purchase was a part of the State Department’s Energy Efficiency Sweep of Europe initiative, which included hundreds of thousands of taxpayer dollars on green program expenditures at various U.S. Embassies," Kelly stated.

While the embassy in Vienna was going green, the consulate in Benghazi was getting bombed, and little was done to stop it, according to Kelly. According to Rep. Issa, the Oversight Committee will expand the focus of the investigation of the attack -- that left four men dead, including Amb. Chris Stevens -- to include officials in the Obama White House, as well as the Hillary Clinton-led U.S. State Department.

Following the testimony of State Department staffers about the lack of diplomatic security at the Benghazi consulate, Issa sent President Obama an official letter demanding to know why the administration reduced U.S. security in Libya while the country was still emerging from a civil war. The State Department contracted a small security firm to provide untrained and ill-prepared guards recruited from the Libyan population.

Issa said a witness at the committee's hearing testified that the decision not to call back a 16-person security team over the embassy's objection was made as part of efforts to normalize relations with Libya, despite Democrats' denials.

"Americans … deserve a complete explanation about your administration's decision to accelerate a normalized presence in Libya at what now appears to be at the cost of endangering lives,” Issa wrote. “These critical foreign policy decisions are not made by low- or mid-level career officials — they are typically made through a structured and well-reasoned process that includes the National Security Council at the White House. The ultimate responsibility rests with you as the president of the United States.”