Most Read
Image 01 Image 02 Image 03

Jay Carney attempts to throw CIA under the bus on Benghazi talking points

Jay Carney attempts to throw CIA under the bus on Benghazi talking points

I’ll post the video when available.

(Wow, GOP Rapid Response got this video out really quickly)

Here are some tweets as it took place:


DONATE

Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.

Comments

Carney is such a snake. I don’t know how he sleeps at night.

Thanks for keeping up with what’s going on Prof. You’re a better news source than the so-called “Main” Stream Media.

Henry Hawkins | May 10, 2013 at 4:25 pm

Mr. Carney, meet your President, Mr. Mephistopheles.

[Scene: backwater, closet-sized office deep within the White House. Jay Carney sits on a stool rocking back and forth, muttering, a bit of drool running down his chin…. “I can’t believe I took this job! I can’t believe I gave up a cushy gig at Time for this bullshit! OMG, OMG, OMG! I can’t believe I threw in with these clowns! I’ll never work again! I could end up in prison!”]

Mr. Carney: what did you know, and when did you know it?

Oh, yeah…

and who told you that butt-load of lies to pass along to the American people?

And remember…

you are under oath, and WILL be prosecuted for lying.

Given that the upper echelon of the CIA is pretty much all Ivy League progressives, you’re expecting too much. They would have sunk George W. Bush long ago.

And even if somebody DID leak something to hurt the administration, our mainstream media will sit on it.

I repeat, you’re expecting too much here. Prepare to hear little to nothing in terms of “payback leaks”.

This is a trap. The WH will gladly argue over how the words were changed rather than explain how Stevens got into the situation in the first place.

1. Security reduced against his will
2. Obama claiming THIS is how you win a war with no downside- unlike Iraq. But ignoring the Islamic threat.
3. Hillary sent Stevens out there. He was there because of her.
4. If proven, CIA and State were running guns to Syria, via Turkey (Iran/Contra anyone??)

Jay will talk about press releases and drafts all day.

    JON in reply to archer52. | May 10, 2013 at 8:14 pm

    I believe you are correct, sir.

    deadrody in reply to archer52. | May 11, 2013 at 3:00 am

    4. If proven, CIA and State were running guns to Syria, via Turkey (Iran/Contra anyone??)

    I think this could be the single biggest thing they are trying to hide here AND the entire reason nothing was done to help the people under attack that night in Benghazi.

    I don’t necessarily oppose covert operations to arm rebels fighting against tyrants, but the legality of it is another matter entirely. It doesn’t help that the “rebels” in this case are not fighting against the USSR like they were in Afghanistan, and that they are Islamic extremists that hate us all the same.

    Nothing about that will bode well for Obama or Clinton.

Of course we believe everything Jay Carney says even though he works for the “little father of lies”‘

Petraeus.

    Mary Sue in reply to janitor. | May 10, 2013 at 5:23 pm

    Must have been the mother of all coincidences that Petraeus’s dirty laundry was leaked once the second term was in the bag huh? Not excusing his personal mess but come on, I will bet the destruction of Petraeus was intended to prevent a press conference like today from ever happening.

      Bruno Lesky in reply to Mary Sue. | May 10, 2013 at 7:37 pm

      Petraeus on Sept 14 re: Benghazi: the Sept 11 Benghazi attack was “spontaneous.”

      per Breitbart, “Charles Krauthammer has theorized that Petraeus only did this because he was in the difficult spot of trying to keep his affair under wraps and also trying to keep his job: He appeased the Obama administration in an effort to accomplish both ends.”

      Petraeus goes back to Capitol Hill on Nov 16. Per U.S. Rep. Peter King, R-NY, “He [Petraeus] … stated that he thought all along he made it clear that there was significant terrorist involvement, and that is not my recollection of what he told us on Sept 14,” King said.

      “The clear impression we were given (in September) was that the overwhelming amount of evidence was that it arose out of a spontaneous demonstration, and was not a terrorist attack,” he said.

      I assume he’s not a perp but he’s a dupe.

      Bring him back to Congress under oath. (Give his mistress immunity and however else they do this on Law and Order to get the confession!)

      A bit more below.

        Bruno Lesky in reply to Bruno Lesky. | May 10, 2013 at 7:46 pm

        On Oct 26, Petraeus mistress Paula Broadwell told her Univ of Denver audience that Petraeus knew almost immediately that the attack was a terror attack — possibly to free militia members being detained and interrogated (Libyan and others from Africa and the Middle East).

        Bring her in and incentivize her to tell the truth.

I imagine more information is going to be “leaked” to congress after Carney’s stupid little stunt. The admin tried this shortly after Benghazi and there was pushback from the CIA.

Uncle Samuel | May 10, 2013 at 5:25 pm

You all forget, Obama has put his Islamophilia guy in as head of CIA and State Dept. now, so don’t look for any embarrassing leaks from those quarters.

MaggotAtBroadAndWall | May 10, 2013 at 5:59 pm

Rand Paul is now saying Hillary is disqualified from being president because of Benghazi and Senator Inhofe is floating the possibility of impeaching Obama.

I assume Republicans have more cards to play. If not, they are overplaying their hand. Big time.

[…] Insurrection has the link. Watch the video. The MSM doesn’t seem to have the brightest bulbs in its employ. Jay does a […]

Henry Hawkins | May 10, 2013 at 6:38 pm

A lame duck whose power is dwindling daily ought not piss off his own people, especially when they hold the evidence that could get him impeached.

The Smart Power Posse has managed to split its own forces against one another: WH vs. State vs. CIA.

It’s been an absolute riot today! It’s Keystone Cops at the WH. Can you believe the “private” press briefing, no attribution allowed? Any reporter who agreed to that would be shamed into retirement were there any real journalists left. Then Jay boy blames Romney and the CIA. Hahahahaha!

The ball is rolling. The WH is in full banana-republic mode.

BannedbytheGuardian | May 10, 2013 at 7:37 pm

I caught the Romney attack.

Iirc the timeline was that Romney was first addressing the attack on the Egyptian embassy & the Embassy’s twitter apology .

This was about 8 hours after the attacks began & in the vacuum of no WH condemnation. Benghazi was just about to begin & he had no knowledge of that attack. Yet he was bamed for it

Bruno Lesky | May 10, 2013 at 8:08 pm

I’d like the date-time-form-event of the Benghazi cover up to come out in full.

The Obamamites thought we would all fall in line for their BS.

Benghazi opens the possibility for realistic reassessments:
— elected people can lie to us to preserve power.
— governments can operate far above their level of competence to execute.
— administrations can work against the survival of the people they are governing.

e.g. How could it possibly be so that our government is supporting Muslim Brotherhood ascendancy? Cui bono?

Bruno Lesky | May 10, 2013 at 8:33 pm

One more thing. Yeah, maybe the violent protest at the US embassy in Egypt was because of theYouTube video (per Obamamite talking points.)

But who was the U.S. State Dept. spokesperson who defined it so? Victoria Nuland!

Reuters report re violence in Egypt: The US embassy had put out a statement earlier on [Sept 11] condemning ‘misguided individuals’ who hurt the religious feelings of Muslims or followers or other religions. ‘We firmly reject the actions by those who abuse the universal right of free speech to hurt the religious beliefs of others,’ the US embassy said in its statement.”

From the same Reuters report: “When US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton visited in July, after Mursi was sworn in, her motorcade was pelted with tomatoes.” What, no video?

Maybe a fantasy narrative by our US State Dept etc. about the reason for the Egyptian attack on the US embassy … pre-dating the fantasy narrative re: Benghazi?

As above, restated, we can’t believe these clowns.

This guy is the sleaziest, scummiest, most pathological person ever to front for US elected official.

The most frightening fact is, he’s perfectly suited for his boss.

Zip-a-dee-doo-dah, zip-a-dee-ay. Gettin’ my Nixon on today!

Amateurs who think they’re brighter than the rest of Washington.

BannedbytheGuardian | May 11, 2013 at 3:04 am

Regarding Eric Boehlet ( media matters) spin .

On Twittet & Highlighted at Twitchy he is saying 270 Americans killed at embassy in Beirut 1983.

People are pointing out that Regan did not try to hide it etc but Boehlert is wrong. These were not Embassy attacks . They & the French were part of an International peace force that were attacked at a barracks at the airport & the French at another building 2 minutes later.

One similarity is that unlike the French – the Americans did not respond.

Hence we have Hezbollah today.

But an example of responders being drawn in on a falsehood.

    Ragspierre in reply to BannedbytheGuardian. | May 11, 2013 at 7:33 am

    You are right and wrong.

    America DID respond.

    Both in the near and long terms.

    But the Moonbattery of the Collective excels at ad hominem tu quoque, which has the form, “Oh yeah?, your guy did it, too”.

    It is fallacious because it never addresses the alleged wrong.

Banned I believe then President Reagan had the Med. Fleet “tossing Volkswagon sized shells onto the coast of Lebanon” as a response to the Marine barracks bombing.

Midwest Rhino | May 11, 2013 at 12:59 pm

Even as this breaks the media cone of silence, they twist the facts to yield as little ground as possible. A few strategies:

1. It was just inter-agency squabble … AFTER the fact. “What difference does it make NOW”. (Hillary’s line was practiced … to minimalize the issue.)

2. We did everything we could have … no more assets were available to make a difference. No stand down orders. (this was the practiced “angry” response from Obama in the debate … but appears false, and more assets SHOULD HAVE been in place)

3. Witch hunt … covert operations made us keep secrets (was this why Romney backed down, since he had intel?)

4-20 … all the variations from media/propaganda branch of the left’s internal army, that will protect their team, and divert from the truth. Several “blame Republicans” strategies are already out there.

Anyway … besides what Archer said above, the big issue seems to be that Obama has changed “no man left behind”, to “the pawns will be sacrificed to save Queen Hillary and King Obama”. Not sacrificed for the American interests, but for political campaigns based in subterfuge, with intent to weaken and transform US. (why did Biden expose Seal team 6 and their families?) All this damages esprit de corps.

Obama has yet to clarify why he wants an internal security force as powerful and well funded as our military. He is certainly funding his unions, trying to give them power over even our health care. Whatever “internal force” is planned, you can bet it would be run by union “generals” like Trumka.

But the men in the trenches for the military, CIA, ICE and FBI … may have more love for country than to watch these leftist tyrants destroy US. Time for the whistleblowers to all blow their “rape whistles” in harmony against this regime. Did Obama’s army of leftists think these good men would just roll over and take it?

Can’t wait for him to throw the Secret Service under the bus and then expect them to take a bullet for Obama.

Font Resize
Contrast Mode
Send this to a friend