Tuesday, May 20, 2014

The Left 's Forked Tongue Brigade Continues To Circle The Wagons On Benghazi


The Professional Left continues to try and disparage the Benghazi select committee investigations with all its might, and the Obama media are certainly doing their best to help by ignoring the actual facts as much as possible.The Forked Tongue Brigade is out in all their putrid glory.

Two old Leftist camp followers conveniently provide us with an overview of the sort of talking points being used to attack the committee in advance, so that its findings can be 'discredited' before they surface. Lets look at them, shall we?

Eleanor Clift is simply an old line, loudmouth Marxist whom the Daily Beast inherited from News-weak. She hasn't has an original thought in years, but pretty much parrots the usual talking points going around. However, when she does improvise, it's a real doozy. On PBS' The McLaughlin Group the other day, she actually managed to come up with one - That Ambassador Chris Stevens wasn't murdered in Benghazi..he, umm, died of smoke inhalation:

The fact that Chris Stevens may very well have been clinging to life when he was raped and beaten (we have no way of really knowing) and the violent way the other three Benghazi victims died doesn't seem to make an impact on Eleanor Clift. Using her logic, I suppose if someone sneaked into her penthouse digs, tied her up and put duct tape over the nose and mouth on her heavily botoxed face, we could say she wasn't murdered either..it was, you know, respiratory failure.

After discussing her faux pas with the usual suspects and getting a fresh briefing on the proper talking points, Ms. Clift decided to double down today in the Daily Beast (I refuse to link to this garbage but I'm sure you can easily find it).

Now her story is that she was taken out of context (she wasn't) that it was the CIA's fault, and that it was Chris Steven' fault because he 'took risks he shouldn't have'.

Next, she puts out some cock and bull tale she's sourced to an unnamed 'ambassador' about the reason for the attack being an attempt to free prisoners being held at the CIA annex. Of course, that fable doesn't account for why the consulate was attacked, rather than just the annex. And even if that was remotely true, what about all the lies on 'it was the video'? And why the subsequent cover up?

After that it's time to play 'look at Reagan'. She cites an article written by a fellow Leftist shill that calls what happened in Beirut in the 1980's 'Reagan's Benghazi'. She relates how the Democrat majority House investigated and found 'very serious errors in judgment' and recommended additional security measures, but 'did not see it as an opportunity to score political points'.

Actually, there's a pretty good reason for that. The 'serious errors in judgment' had nothing to do with the president or anyone else in DC, but the judgment of the house committee that the commanders on the ground at a time before this kind of tactic was common should have somehow foreseen that some Hezbollah jihadi would drive a truck though the barriers and set off a suicide truck bomb.

And the reason the Democrats failed to 'score political points’? Well, that's another difference between Benghazi and Beirut, Ronaldus Maximus and Barack Obama. The Left didn't score political points because they couldn't. From Day One, President Reagan was completely cooperative with the investigation. He allowed Congress complete access to all information, and instead of lying and stonewalling, the Reagan Administration was an active partner in wanting to get to the bottom of what happened.

There were no lies for partisan political purposes, no documents hastily reclassified in an effort to hide them, no witnesses or survivors hidden away. And could anyone even remotely imagine President Reagan leaving our people to fight to the death for nine hours and doing nothing to save them because he was busy resting up for a fundraiser?

A different kind of president and a different kind of man entirely. Someone the Forked Tongue Brigade could never understand.

I'm taking the time to deconstruct this because trust me, you're going to hear this kind of horse manure again and again.

As a matter of fact, none other than the junior Senator from California, Barbara Boxer, came out with her version of White House talking points today on the always amusing Huffington Post.

Good old Senator Babs is no quiz kid as anyone familiar with her record knows, but she has at least a few IQ points on Eleanor Clift, and of course, much better staffers.

The senator starts out using the standard Democrat slogan for the select committee, calling it 'a political witch hunt'. She calls it that because 'the committee 'rejected House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi's offer to have a fair panel with equal representation from Republicans and Democrats' and because a few Republicans are 'fundraising off this tragedy'.

I've already dealt with that previously, but it obviously bears repeating. The 'even split' San Fran Nan wanted is something she would have rejected outright when she was Speaker after she stopped cackling. Actually, no select committee in history has ever been set up in that manner. And does anyone recall how Democrats instantly sent out fundraisers after Sandy Hook, Katrina, Columbine,the Gabby Giffords shooting and every other tragedy you can imagine? Pot, meet kettle.

And that's not all..the minority leader also insisted on some unheard changes in the committee's rules. She wanted the Democrats on the committee to have veto power over whatever subpoenas the committee issued, and over the ability of Republican members to interview witnesses separately. The ability of the Chairman of a select committee to issue subpoenas on his own authority and for the majority party to interview witnesses in camera are pretty standard items for select committees, and agreeing to Nancy Pelosi's terms would pretty much have insured that the cover-up would continue unabated. Not only that, but in Rep. Elijah Cummings' (D-MD) behavior on the House Oversight committee on IRS-Gate (for which he's currently facing ethics charges), we have an example of exactly how Pelosi's appointees would have done their best to sabotage the proceedings by leaking details of the committee's investigation to the very people they were investigation and attempting to intimidate witnesses.

Funny thing, those details didn’t make it into Bab's little HuffPo screed.

Next, she questions why we need another investigation after those 'exhaustive' 9 attempts to investigate Benghazi(actually 7)...attempts that failed because the White House has repeatedly lied about how the talking points blaming the attack on a spontaneous demonstration and a video were deliberately constructed for partisan political purposes, refused to release the documentation congress requested and actually hid documents from them.

Not only that, but let's not forget that the Benghazi survivors are still prevented from speaking congress by the Obama Administration, that Secretary Clinton has never been questioned under oath and that all of the security videos as well as the telephone recordings and transcripts of conversations between the White House, the consulate and the CIA annex are all still classified and hidden away from congress as well. Any wonder they didn't find out anything?

And then comes the real zinger..this is all the Republicans fault because they supposedly cut funds for security to our embassies and consulates. This is a deliberate lie, and even Senator Boxer knows it. Congress sets budgets, and in this case the budget cut was not for 'security' but across the board, and it was up to the State Department and none other than Secretary of State Hillary Clinton's responsibility to decide where exactly to allocate the funds allotted, not Congress.

And what did Mrs. Clinton choose to spend the money on while cutting security for Benghazi? How about a fleet of overpriced Chevy Volts and a pricy electric vehicle charging station for our embassy at the notoriously dangerous post in Vienna, Austria!

These funds were allocated as part of part of the State Department’s “Energy Efficiency Sweep of Europe” initiative, which spent hundreds of thousands of taxpayer dollars on green program expenditures at various U.S. Embassies at the same time Mrs. Clinton was cutting security at our embassies and consulates in Libya and ignoring Ambassador Stevens' frantic requests.

That detail didn't make it into Senator Babs' article either. But as expected, the senator goes on to mention Beirut and Reagan again, so obviously the word had gone out from the White House spin meisters to repeat this one.

The fact that these pathetic women would try and spin this in such a fashion is a disgrace, but then both of them passed the boundaries of shame long ago.

The real disgrace is that the Obama Administration would continue to try and spin the unspinnable and sweep the unforgivable under the rug.

Four Americans died through negligence, and this president and his team lied about it to protect Barack Obama's re-election, even to the point of lying to the dead men's loved ones in front of their coffins. And they continue to lie about it to this day.

As I wrote on these pages long ago, the ghosts of those men are restless and demand justice. All the the disgraceful antics of the Obama Regime and its sycophants don't change that.

And even more, in a strange way Benghazi is a battle between the country our Founders bequeathed to us and the kind of place the Forked Tongue Brigade, the Obamas, the Hillarys, the Pelosis and the Boxers want to turn it into.

They cannot be allowed that victory.

No comments: