WOODWARD: Obama Lied About BenghaziGate

SJJRSJJS

SJJRSJJS

Verified User
Bob Woodward is the reporter who broke open the Nixon era WaterGate scandal, so he is non-partisan when it comes to critical White House scandals...........
This morning on "Meet The Press", Bob Woodward insinuated: Obama Administration Didn’t Tell Truth on Benghaz"
 
Poor Bob...what is this now we've had to disprove his feeble attempts at a little spotlight in the past couple of months as he snuggles up with the right and FOX? He should have retired and died while he had the chance. Instead, he's just making a fool of himself.

The Washington Post's Bob Woodward, based on a series of dubious factual errors, is now offering a flawed comparison between the Watergate scandal and the Obama administration's response to the September terror attack in Benghazi, Libya.

There's no small irony to Woodward injecting himself into what has become a scandal driven by deceptively edited emails passed off to reporters, given the recent attention he received after using a similar method to support his ridiculous accusation that a White House aide threatened him.

In his latest attempt to jump into the debate on the side of the right wing, Woodward demonstrates a striking lack of familiarity with the basic facts of what happened.

Here's what Woodward said during his May 17 appearance on MSNBC's Morning Joe, and what's wrong with those statements.

WOODWARD: You were talking earlier about kind of dismissing the Benghazi issue as one that's just political and the president recently said it's a sideshow. But if you read through all these e-mails, you see that everyone in the government is saying, "Oh, let's not tell the public that terrorists were involved, people connected to al Qaeda. Let's not tell the public that there were warnings."

If Woodward actually did read through all the recently-released emails from intelligence officials and other administration aides discussing the assembly of the much-ballyhooed talking points used in the wake of the attacks, he seems to have missed a few things. Administration officials suggested removing references to the al Qaeda ties of attackers because they were worried about tainting the investigation of the perpetrators, as David Petraeus, who was CIA director at the time of the attacks, later testified. Meanwhile, CIA Deputy Director Mike Morell reportedly advocated for removing references to general CIA warnings about potential attacks -- there had been no specific threat warning for that day. As CBS News pointed out on May 16, the CIA signed off on all changes, and there is "no evidence" that the White House "orchestrated" the changes.

WOODWARD: I hate to show, that this is one of the documents with the editing that one of the people in the State Department said, 'Oh, let's not let these things out.'

Woodward appears to be holding this document, in which hand-written edits were made removing several paragraphs of the talking points during the "deputies meeting" of the National Security Council. But that editing was reportedly performed by the CIA's Morell, not anyone from the State Department. Morell reportedly approved the document for distribution.

And I have to go back 40 years to Watergate when Nixon put out his edited transcripts to the conversations, and he personally went through them and said, "Oh, let's not tell this, let's not show this."

There are three obvious flaws in Woodward's comparison:

The transcripts he's talking about were of Oval Office meetings on Watergate and were given to Congress in response to their subpoena of tapes of those meetings. That's simply nothing like edits made to a set of talking points to be used in media appearances.
The edits he's talking about were made by Nixon himself. Nothing remotely resembling evidence of Obama's involvement in the Benghazi talking points has been revealed.
The edits removed evidence of Nixon's possibly criminal behavior. No one has alleged that any crime was committed by the administration with regard to Benghazi.

WOODWARD: I would not dismiss Benghazi. It's a very serious issue. As people keep saying, four people were killed.

No one doubts that Benghazi is serious, precisely because it involved the tragic deaths of Americans. It's the trumped-up claims of administration malfeasance that are clearly a "sideshow."

WOODWARD: You look at the hydraulic pressure that was in the system to not tell the truth, and, you know, we use this term and the government uses this term, talking points. Talking points, as we know, are like legal briefs. They're an argument on one side. What we need to do is get rid of talking points and they need to put out statements or papers that are truth documents. Okay, this is all we know.

Again, the edits made to the talking points came in order to protect the FBI's investigation of the perpetrators of the attack. It's simply foolhardy to think that the administration is going to give out information that jeopardizes their ability to capture people who killed Americans. That's a legitimate reason not to give out "all we know."
Click to expand...

Note: The highlighted red part is what I've been trying to say all along...fucking traitors!
 
Last edited:
Paul Ryan On Benghazi: 'I Don't Know' If There Was A Cover-up

WASHINGTON -- Rep. Paul Ryan (R-Wis.) said Sunday that he does not know whether President Barack Obama intentionally misled the public about the nature of the September 2012 attack in Benghazi, Libya, backtracking from previous comments that the administration had engaged in a "cover-up."

"What we now know from congressional testimony is that the number two man in Benghazi, the deputy chief of mission, informed his superiors including the secretary of state that this was a terrorist attack," Ryan said during an appearance on "Fox News Sunday."

"Those of us who have had the briefings, seen the videos, know there was no protest involved. To suggest afterwards that this was the result of a spontaneous protest, we now know is not the case. So the burden of proof here is on the administration's side. It is -- why did they continue to push this kind of a story when they knew nearly immediately afterwards that that was not the case?"


Damn Obama. Ansar al-Sharia used Facebook and Twitter to claim responsibility for the attack on the U.S. Consulate in Benghazi. WHY didn't Obama elevate this small band of thugs to the status of al Qaeda?

He could have said something like Bush did...

Our enemies are innovative and resourceful...They never stop thinking about new ways to harm our country and our people, and neither do we.
George W. Bush
 
Why don't they just return to the business of job creation, it is the #1 issue on Citizens minds.
 
The present corrupt government prevents any meaningful business from getting accomplished. Cronyism is rampant....no budgets passed, no reform, and most of all, there is
one willing to take responsibility .... just saying you're responsible with no penalty for fucking up is ludicrous....
 
SJJRSJJS said:
Bob Woodward is the reporter who broke open the Nixon era WaterGate scandal, so he is non-partisan when it comes to critical White House scandals...........
This morning on "Meet The Press", Bob Woodward insinuated: Obama Administration Didn’t Tell Truth on Benghaz"
Click to expand...

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/05/17/bob-woodward-benghazi-watergate_n_3292164.html?ir=Media

First comment, following the article:

POLITICAL PUNDIT·4,004 Fans·When in Rome.......
Woodward wrote a laudatory book about Bush until the political climate change and Bush was considered a fool. He goes whichever way the winds are blowing. Two months from now he will be saying Obama is the greatest president ever. Comparisons between Obama and Nixon are ludicrous. There is no evidence any of these so-called scandals reached the White House and there was no illegality, as there was widespread illegality in Nixon's day. The phone records of journalists were obtained legally and the talking points about Benghazi amount to inter-agency squabbling and little else. The acting head of the IRS has been fired over the targeting of conservative groups. There is no there there behind any of these "scandals" just Republican efforts to sully the administration. In three weeks all these 'scandals" will have disappeared as did the so-called fury over Operation Fast and Furious.

LOL. There is nothing to the scandals of late that negatively impact the White House. Just more political jockeying by the sour grapes "right". LOL
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/05/19/obama-approval-rating_n_3302580.html
 
poet said:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/05/17/bob-woodward-benghazi-watergate_n_3292164.html?ir=Media

First comment, following the article:

POLITICAL PUNDIT·4,004 Fans·When in Rome.......
Woodward wrote a laudatory book about Bush until the political climate change and Bush was considered a fool. He goes whichever way the winds are blowing. Two months from now he will be saying Obama is the greatest president ever. Comparisons between Obama and Nixon are ludicrous. There is no evidence any of these so-called scandals reached the White House and there was no illegality, as there was widespread illegality in Nixon's day. The phone records of journalists were obtained legally and the talking points about Benghazi amount to inter-agency squabbling and little else. The acting head of the IRS has been fired over the targeting of conservative groups. There is no there there behind any of these "scandals" just Republican efforts to sully the administration. In three weeks all these 'scandals" will have disappeared as did the so-called fury over Operation Fast and Furious.

LOL. There is nothing to the scandals of late that negatively impact the White House. Just more political jockeying by the sour grapes "right". LOL
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/05/19/obama-approval-rating_n_3302580.html
Click to expand...


Did Woodward ever backtrack what he said in this "laudatory" book ? If he didn't, then your claim that he goes whichever way the winds are blowing is just wrong.
And the rest of your post is nothing but your opinion, far left opinion...this is far from over and it will mostly depend on if the msm will finally start doing its job
in informing the public of FACTS and stop protecting Obama and liberals in general....

Just because the character assassination of Bush worked so well to feed your BDS doesn't make mean a thing.....firing the IRS liar a month before his temp. job
was to end means little....the IRS committed crimes against the civil rights of citizens and they don't need to be fired, they need to be charged and stand trial.

If Huffington is all ya got, don't waste our time or yours.
 
Last edited:
NOVA said:
Did Woodward ever backtrack what he said in this "laudatory" book ? If he didn't, then your claim that he goes whichever way the winds are blowing is just wrong.
And the rest of your post is nothing but your opinion, far left opinion...this is far from over and it will mostly depend on if the msm will finally start doing its job
in informing the public of FACTS and stop protecting Obama and liberals in general....

Just because the character assassination of Bush worked so well to feed your BDS doesn't make mean a thing.....firing the IRS liar a month before his temp. job
was to end means little....the IRS committed crimes against the civil rights of citizens and they don't need to be fired, they need to be charged and stand trial.

If Huffington is all ya got, don't waste our time or yours.
Click to expand...

Better he careful or Bravo will quote some Canadian Free Press!
 
NOVA said:
The present corrupt government prevents any meaningful business from getting accomplished. Cronyism is rampant....no budgets passed, no reform, and most of all, there is
one willing to take responsibility .... just saying you're responsible with no penalty for fucking up is ludicrous....
Click to expand...
The us is producing more than ever. Simpleton
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top