Makes perfect sense. Obama can hand her a cue card with any lie and fabrication
printed on it and whe will present it as fact. Another way for Obama to lie
without his fingerprints being on it.
I don't know about any advising, but Ms Rice can certainly be counted on
the parrot whatever the president decides the official story is.I do
take issue with the article describing the talking points as provided by the
intelligence community, they appear at the point to have been provided by the
Ooooooh Boy!Stand by for the conservative explosion.
Not sure how secure I feel now.
One old man-Based on her performance of blatant lies following the
Bengahzi attacks, this should be a non-partisan, American people explosion. There is no doubt-carry Obama's water and be taken care of.
Oooooh boy is right, one exposed liar advising another suspected liar.
Both parties should come out against this, unless the lives lost in Benghazi
don't mean anything to you.
Susan Rice is one of the emerging group of radical women that Obama is moving
into leadership positions. If you watched Kirsten Gillebrand yesterday take on
the entire military establishment with Claire McCaskill, you will know
definitely that "something is up". Sadly all that John McCain could
muster was that he could not advise a mother to let her daughter go into the
military. Now J-Mac with your POW experience, what about those "crippled
guys" coming back? Let's focus on the real reason to grill Ms. Rice on
her policies. Her actions at Bengazi do not lend to a lot of confidence to
support for her leadership. The real issue is just to what extent the Obama
Administration is supporting radical Islam in the Middle East and by connection
the same question in the United States.
Re One old man: Nothing to worry about. The conservative explosion will be
ignited by simpleton view points. The most likely end result will be self
One thing you can say about "Ole BO" - he rewards loyalty. Actually I
think it's Valerie Jarret that rewards loyalty, BO is just her parrot.NSA - great place for Rice - No Senate confirmation, no questions asked
- just high level power to the ones that he loves.
@one old manBy your logic we should seek out those who will tell lies.This isn't a liberal or conservative thing. It's about integrity in
high places.But I see your point. Someone willing to protect the
narrative would be important to a politician. And she's surely done that.
Gotta love these AP articles:Paragraph 1 reports the news.Paragraphs 2-20 apologize for Obama or any other Democrat involved in the
day's bad news. Pointing the finger at Republicans is another often-used
Mohokat: Ouch - cheap shot.
Genius plan, since any person interested in the actual facts, already knows
Benghazi is a nothing more than semantics and opinuendo. Fox twisted it into
something only devout worshipers of hate radio still believe. These
"patriots" think they are being denied the lynching they so desperately
want for this president.This will keep the fringe talking about it,
and Obama knowing there's nothing to be found isn't worried about how
deep they'll dig. This will keep those who would never support this
president anyway busy for a while rehashing the same thing over and over waiting
for something to appear from the void.
This is a very smart way to put her under executive privilege so she can't
be called to testify before Congress. Very clever!
Happy Valley, don't worry, Obama has more and more scandle to come. And by
keeping around many of the same people who are involved, like Holder and Rice,
he will have lynched himself. I mean does anyone really doubt that the White
House told the IRS to go after conservatives after the T-Party ruined Obamas
Susan Rice:"But our current best assessment, based on the information
that we have at present, is that, in fact, what this began as, it was a
spontaneous — not a premeditated — response to what had transpired
in Cairo. In Cairo, as you know, a few hours earlier, there was a violent
protest that was undertaken in reaction to this very offensive video that was
disseminated.We believe that folks in Benghazi, a small number of
people came to the embassy to — or to the consulate, rather, to replicate
the sort of challenge that was posed in Cairo. And then as that unfolded, it
seems to have been hijacked, let us say, by some individual clusters of
extremists who came with heavier weapons, weapons that as you know in — in
the wake of the revolution in Libya are — are quite common and accessible.
And it then evolved from there."Benghazi talking points drafted
by the CIA:"We believe based on currently available information that
the attacks in Benghazi were spontaneously inspired by the protests at the U.S.
Embassy in Cairo" "There are indications that extremists
participated in the violent demonstrations."
@ one old man and Happy Valley Heretic:How fitting. A self
proclaimed old man and a heretic lecturing the rest of us, while continuing to
follow the ostrich approach by keeping their heads in the sand to avoid dealing
with the real world. Rice is what she is, and her record is what it
is. So far, her track record isn't flattering by any standard. To appoint
someone who has recently been so controversial to such a high level position is
not a smart political move. It only creates more controversy to an
administration that is becoming more exposed on a weekly basis.There
are plenty of other well qualified candidates, who are not controversial, whom
Obama could've appointed and thus began restoring some confidence to his
administration. But he chose not to. Not totally unexpected, since he can't
run for office again. By any objective measurements, this administration is far
from what was promised during the presidential campaigns. Anyone without their
heads in the sand could readily see so.
@UtahVET1"Both parties should come out against this, unless the lives
lost in Benghazi don't mean anything to you."I really do
not understand why someone is unfit for their job because of one instance of
reporting something that turned out to be incorrect. Seems to me you only care
about lives lost in Benghazi as far as you can exploit them for political gain.
@JBQ"If you watched Kirsten Gillebrand yesterday take on the entire
military establishment with Claire McCaskill, you will know definitely that
"something is up"."If you paid attention to what they
were saying instead of defaulting to bashing women you would know they've
been railing against the fact that sexual assaults in the military are way up,
to an estimated 26k a year while only around 1% of those ever led to conviction.
Why am I not surprised by this? The American people should be up in arms about
this. This is a reflection of where the current adminstration is going and
taking down our country with it. Based on previous experience with her, why
would you want her as an advisor when she reads from the que cards so perfectly?
The American people see right through this one.
We will make our government honest, accountable, and transparent. We will not
with hold information, and transparency will be the rule of law. Barack
Obama-2009Rice was not truthful concerning Benghazi, and now becomes
National Security Adviser? There's little transparency, and honesty on
and the circling of the wagons continues. This is a sign to all those rogue irs
agents that the boss will protect and promote you if you do his bidding and keep
your mouth shut!
Re: atl134 You say, someone should not be unfit for the job because
of one instance of reporting something that turned out to be incorrect. Rice was
not a reporter, but a government official, who probably knew soon after her
weekend round of shows that what she said was wrong. She has made no effort to
correct the record and it is obvious that Obama is giving her the new position
now in order to keep her from going out and writing her book. He is now in the
"run out the clock" mode for his Presidency. Sad for a guy that brought
so much hope to so many. So many thought Obama was something special. He
isn't, he's a typical mediocore politican.
Well, at least the President is consistent. If he ever made a sane choice for a
cabinet member or a czar, I missed it. Inept, tax cheating ideologues are his
Trust? Integrity? Protecting our interests? Quid pro Quo? Do as I am doing?
She could have taken Carney's place as she proved she could serve the
President in all things on all networks.
What did Rice say that was not truthful?She represented what the CIA
talking points said at the time.Testifying at a hearing of the
Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee, Matt Olsen, the
director of the National Counterterrorism Center in response to questioning from
Chairman Joe Lieberman (I-CT) about the attack that killed Ambassador Chris
Stevens and three other Americans."I would say yes, they were
killed in the course of a terrorist attack on our embassy,""The U.S. government just isn't sure yet whether the terrorist attack
was pre-planned or whether it was an example of terrorists taking advantage of
protests against an anti-Islam film.""It appears that
individuals who were certainly well-armed seized on the opportunity presented as
the events unfolded that evening and into the morning hours of September 12th.
We do know that a number of militants in the area, as I mentioned, are
well-armed and maintain those arms. What we don't have at this point is
specific intelligence that there was a significant advanced planning or
coordination for this attack," he said. The Cable, Foreign Policy,
George Bush routinely tweeked the political nose of Democrats.No
Problem.President Obama tweeks the political nose of Republicans.Big Problem.
TruthseekerWhat we don't have is the answer to many questions
such as, why did the Administration not try to send help when this attack was
going on for hours. Why did they, stick to the talking point about claiming it
was not a terriorist attack but a response to an anti Muslim video. That story
went on at the UN by Obama, Hillary on a TV apology in the Middle-East, and
Obama again on the View and Letterman, not to mention the numerous statements by
Carney to the WH press corps. We are not yet sure where the "talking
points" that Rice had came from, even though you seem sure they were CIA.
We don't know where Obama was for about 12 hours during the attack, and
what he was doing, before he flew out to a Las Vegas fundraiser, where, he once
again said the attack was inspired by a film on the net. Why was Ambassador
Stevens sent to Benghazi without usual staff and security support? What was his
mission? There are plenty of unanswered questions here. I'll bet if this
was Bushs' mess, you'd want answers too.
This country has no concept of what an honest government with character is. Low
expectations lead to a seventeen trillion dollar debt.Are these 550
leaders in Washington the best we can get?
Rice' new appintment comes as no suprise - rather a shock!
Truthseeker,If you don’t think the Administration lied, why is
there a filmmaker still in jail?The talking points were changed 12
times from the original CIA document. Victoria Nuland in the State
Department didn't want to include information about prior warnings and
security requests because it "could be abused" by members of Congress
"to beat up the State Department for not paying attention to warnings, so
why would we want to feed that either? Concerned …,"CIA-head Petraeus wrote, "Frankly, I’d just as soon not use
this"However, Susan Rice is the questionable person here. If, in
fact, she didn’t know that those talking points were all lies (as it was
never about a video) then the President used her as a tool. We know he again
repeated the untruthful video story two weeks later at the UN. How
can someone be used as a tool in such an egregious manner and then accept
another position in the same person’s administration? She obviously has no
problem lying to the American people, whether she did it knowingly at the time