I'm not sure what it all means, but it will all come out in the end...it almost always does. Obama and jarrett don't have as much power as they think they do. The rats will desert the sinking ship.
WHITE HOUSE INSIDER: Emergency All Call At Obama White House!
- Thread starter Kadosh
- Start date
I'm not sure what it all means, but it will all come out in the end...it almost always does. Obama and jarrett don't have as much power as they think they do. The rats will desert the sinking ship.
I think you misapprehend diplomatic immunity. It would only apply to Hillary if she committed a crime in another country. Does not apply to her here.
I don't understand anything I read here.
Next week we have an opportunity to get rid of this guy and all of his henchmen, including those in Congress. My DD has been pounding the sidewalks for a month on weekends to get Romney's vote out.
Now if you are positive that Romney would have sat there wetting his panties in indecision, then stay home on election day.
BTW, O's reaction was predictable. His history is to vote Present. I don't see any of that in R's background.
Next week we have an opportunity to get rid of this guy and all of his henchmen, including those in Congress. My DD has been pounding the sidewalks for a month on weekends to get Romney's vote out.
Now if you are positive that Romney would have sat there wetting his panties in indecision, then stay home on election day.
BTW, O's reaction was predictable. His history is to vote Present. I don't see any of that in R's background.
Rastech
Veteran Member
Vote Romney, but put him, Congress, and the Senate, on notice, that the nonsense stops, and it stops NOW!
gawarriorqueen
WWG1WGA
Just thinkin' out loud here, but what if the Benghazi incident was originally a WH plan? You know, have the ambassador and a few others kidnapped and get threatening demands from the kidnappers, etc. Then, just before election day, 0bama manages to have them released without harm. Big uptick in the poll numbers for 0. But the guys on the ground in Benghazi don't really understand what the big plan really is, so they get their blood up and get all excited and lose control and the entire thing blows-up in 0's face.
That would explain why no help was sent to them ... according to the plan they didn't really need it, it was all part of the plan. But then all the folks turn up dead and 0 goes nuts and it's all "what do we do now?" Maybe they just never considered their plan could go awry? Scrambling to mount a viable explanation would ensue resulting in all the recent mess.
Whatever the circumstances, the WH people knew what was happening ... were watching it happen! The only lives worth anythiing to anyone in power right now are their own. They need to go.
JMHO.
That would explain why no help was sent to them ... according to the plan they didn't really need it, it was all part of the plan. But then all the folks turn up dead and 0 goes nuts and it's all "what do we do now?" Maybe they just never considered their plan could go awry? Scrambling to mount a viable explanation would ensue resulting in all the recent mess.
Whatever the circumstances, the WH people knew what was happening ... were watching it happen! The only lives worth anythiing to anyone in power right now are their own. They need to go.
JMHO.
Like Romney (if voted in) or either house of CONgress, would give a pitcher of warm spit what the peons, er, people want....
Rastech
Veteran Member
No this is transmitted in clear.
The CIA are telling you all in no uncertain terms, that somebody did indeed deny the request for aid, that it certainly wasn't the CIA that denied that request for aid, and they are also telling everybody, that the CIA KNOW PRECISELY WHO denied that request for aid.
They are now relying on certain people in certain positions, to call them to present their evidence to ensure that it is properly entered on the record.
Rastech
Veteran Member
Dennis, you have very little time to turn this around. Obama won't.
You can put Romney on notice that he is staring at a single term, and the mess had better be majorly resolved on his watch, or he faces consequences, along with all the others.
We are equally cynical, I dislike Romney just as much as you, but sometimes, to actually stand a chance of sorting things out, you have to hold your nose.
A situation where a Presidential election is reduced to choosing between two such inexcusable goofballs, must be changed. But Romney is not Obama, and right here right now, that is the only plus that matters, and there are no other choices on the table.
You have a good community here, and you all need to spend the next four years together, whether Democrat, Republican, or A.N.Other, seriously taking names, and kicking arse.
Bear this in mind if thinking of threatening Romney with a single term: Obama would, as a single term president, be able to run again in 2016. And who do you think the dems would run, Biden? So 2016 would be a duplicate of 2012, but in that event, a dismal Romney record would be running against a dismal Obama record.
Think about THAT for awhile....
Think about THAT for awhile....
mbabulldog
Inactive
The Handlers wouldn't prop Obama up for a second run. This experiment of theirs has already proven to be a horrible mistake, and they will find fresh meat that we know nothing of to endorse.
Wolfman
Senior Member
"Post Turtle" Obama
Local | Unknown
Posted on Thursday, July 14, 2011 12:24:24 AM by 56newblog
The old rancher said, 'Well, ya know, Obama is a 'Post Turtle''..
Not being familiar with the term, the doctor asked him, what a 'post turtle' was.
The old rancher said, 'When you're driving down a country road and you come across a fence post with a turtle balanced on top, that's a 'post turtle'.
The old rancher saw the puzzled look on the doctor's face so he continued to explain.
"You know he didn't get up there by himself, he doesn't belong up there, he doesn't know what to do while he's up there, he's elevated beyond his ability to function, and you just wonder what kind of dumb ass put him up there to begin with."
imaginative
keep your eye on the ball
Would never ever even have a chance of happening.
The only chance Ron Paul has of being used to restore this nation is for Romney to win and then appoint RP as Treasury Secretary.
Think about THAT for awhile....
RP would never serve under an administration of someone who would sh*t on the Constitution.
Think about THAT for awhile...
Think about THAT for awhile...
tiger13
Veteran Member
Again I say, everyone has their crystal balls shined up to a high gloss. They can predict beyond a doubt what a Romney Presidency is already going to look like, and the election has not even been held yet. WHY, WHY is every one so dead set against anyone running against the asshole in chief? "we are not" you say? are not you say? well your not even giving Romney a damn chance! You want this country to die? do you? NO YOU SAY? you sure in hell dont sound like it? OH HE IS JUST GOING TO DO THE SAME THING... HOW THE HELL DO YOU KNOW THIS??? Have you invented a time machine? Do you Wish this country to die? are you a closet Obama supporter? if you are then come clean and just say so! for Christ sakes! Romney is the only hope that the country has, as much as you may not like to hear that, think about it, IF OBAMA WINS THIS ELECTION, YOU, ME US, EVERYONE FOREVER, IS ****ED. This country is dead, Give the man a chance to try to do something, BEFORE you judge him as just another Obama. I would rather pin my hopes on him, than see the asshole traitor that stinks up the White House get another crack at killing this country for 4 more years. Think about that before you judge Romney.
Wolfman
Senior Member
Obimbo doesn't go anywhere near Labia. He bats for the other team.
The whole marriage thing is a sham.
NoName
Veteran Member
How do we know tiger? Because Romney has a record as Mass governor, and it's NOT a conservative one.
Pretty simple, really, for those of us who don't have our heads in the sand...
Pretty simple, really, for those of us who don't have our heads in the sand...
bw
Fringe Ranger
That's been one of the most popular theories for some time now.
almost ready
Inactive
While it's true that this theory has been bandied about, the most interesting part of it is that so many people have figured out, independently, that this was the only thing that made sense. Anything else, so close to election day, wouldn't be reasonable. The clincher for me was learning from Ed Woods, the day before he testified before congress, that his team which was withdrawn was only one of three that were withdrawn from the ambassador's protection. In addition, they took away his air support, all in a very brief time period and while he was protesting these withdrawals, and in fact, asking for MORE protection.
Why? Why just the one ambassador? Why in such a wild and wooly place as Libya, where street-fighting is so common that incidents involving the embassy, if only by being directly outside it, numbered in the hundreds.
Something was up, and a reverse October surprise makes such perfect sense and fits so many of the otherwise inexplicable details, it's the only thing left on the table.
If it was a gunrunning incident only, they wouldn't have pulled his security details. If it was a hit on him because he "knew too much" they wouldn't have done it until after the election. If they weren't up to SOMETHING, they wouldn't have pulled his security. Nope, there was something going on all right.
If you haven't been following the war thread closely, you may not know that Morsi of Egypt had just signed on to the war in Syria. He went to Turkey, met with Erdogan, and made all the moves. Now it is possible to get his MB to play along, he needed to show them a good will gesture from the USA. The Blind Sheik, an Imam in jail here, would be the perfect gift, and cement the deal.
Oops.
Heliobas Disciple
TB Fanatic
This is interesting, thanks for pointing it out. In the press release you linked to stating Rodriguez will be assuming command if confirmed by the Senate, it does not say why Ham is leaving or where he is going next. He was only in that position since March 2011, which doesn't seem very long.
here is an excerpt from the article you linked to:
http://www.africom.mil/getArticle.asp?art=8383&lang=0
(fair use applies)
[...]
WASHINGTON, D.C., Oct 19, 2012 — President Obama has nominated Army General David M. Rodriguez to succeed Army General Carter F. Ham as the commander of U.S. Africa Command, Defense Secretary Leon E. Panetta said, October 18, 2012.
[...]
Ham has served as the Africa Command chief since March 2011. "Under his leadership, Africom has played a very central role in some very important missions," the secretary said. "From the NATO campaign in Libya that led to the fall of Gadhafi to successful counterterrorism efforts in Somalia [and] Yemen to efforts we are now involved in in Nigeria and Mali and elsewhere, General Ham has really brought Africom into a very pivotal role in that challenging region."
The nation is "deeply grateful for his outstanding service," he said.
[...]
~~~~~~~~~~
And here's an article from the 25th, and you can see Panetta mentions he consulted with Ham on the 11th. Notice Ham was involved in the early decisions to mobilize, but the order not to go in only came from DC. hmmm. I'd like to find the comment you were referring to, or if you have it, can you post it?
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/10/26/w...of-monitoring-situation-in-benghazi.html?_r=1
(fair use applies)
Panetta Says Risk Impeded Deployment to Benghazi
By ELISABETH BUMILLER
Published: October 25, 2012
WASHINGTON — Defense Secretary Leon E. Panetta said Thursday that he and top military commanders “felt very strongly” that deploying American forces to defend against the fatal attack last month on the United States diplomatic compound in Benghazi, Libya, was too risky because they did not have a clear picture of what was happening on the ground.
“There’s a lot of Monday-morning quarterbacking going on here,” Mr. Panetta told reporters at the Pentagon, adding that “the basic principle is that you don’t deploy forces into harm’s way without knowing what’s going on, without having some real-time information about what’s taking place.”
As a result, Mr. Panetta said, he and two top commanders “felt very strongly that we could not put forces at risk in that situation.” The commanders are Gen. Martin E. Dempsey, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, and Gen. Carter F. Ham of Africa Command, which oversees American military operations in Africa, including Libya.
Mr. Panetta was at the White House for a regular meeting on the afternoon of Sept. 11 as the first reports of the attack unfolded, an American official said. By that evening Mr. Panetta had consulted with General Dempsey and General Ham and had ordered a number of American military forces in the region to move closer to Libya.
Defense officials say they did not receive a request for military support from the State Department as the attack unfolded.
In response to Mr. Panetta’s decision, a small Special Operations “strike force” team moved from Central Europe to the Sigonella Air Base in Sicily while two Navy destroyers already in the Mediterranean were moved off the Libyan coast. A rapid-reaction team of elite Marines left Rota, Spain, and arrived to protect the American Embassy in Tripoli, the Libyan capital, the next day.
But a senior military official said that uncertainty about what was happening on the ground in Libya delayed the decision about where to send the Special Operations forces until about 9 p.m. in Washington, or 3 a.m. on Sept. 12, in Libya.
Ultimately, the decision relayed from the military’s Joint Staff in Washington was “to get close but not into Libya,” the official said. The task force then deployed over the next 24 hours to Sigonella, which is about an hour by plane from Benghazi. But by that time the shooting was over and the Americans were eventually evacuated.
As Mr. Panetta told reporters on Thursday, “This happened within a few hours, and it was really over before we had the opportunity to really know what was happening.”
[...]
~~~~~~~~~
ETA: I found the comment Beach was referring to and will post it here. (control F is a wonderful tool!)
from: http://theulstermanreport.com/2012/...ider-emergency-all-call-at-obama-white-house/
(fair use applies)
ETA: this could be related or not. See Medic38572's thread here:
http://www.timebomb2000.com/vb/show...ultery-other-sex-crimes&p=4608704#post4608704
Gen. Rodriquez is from Ft. Bragg, as is General Sinclair who is being held out to dry as of Sept 26th. Not saying he isn't guilty, how would I know, but if he was doing something for years and no one said anything, and then he spoke up or threatened to speak up, good reason to go after him. And who may have turned him in in Ft. Bragg who is now getting promoted? All conjecture, but if I were writing a script, it would make it more interesting. Alas, life is not fiction, so this could all be coincidence. But throwing it out there for more 'hmmmmm' consideration.
Last edited:
Panetta Says Risk Impeded Deployment to Benghazi
Yes, the risk to the chocolate messiah's re-election hopes....
They were watching as it unfolded. Their men on the ground were in communication with them as it was happening. They knew what was going on. They are full of bullshit and I can't wait for all the truth to come out as I think it eventually will.
Drudge's "Calm before the storm" headline is probably related to this.
Drudge's "Calm before the storm" headline is probably related to this.
almost ready
Inactive
Panetta didn't want one of his drones to get scratched? Just look at what these babies can do
http://www.lastampa.it/2012/10/19/m...i-gheddafi-zRUnBDmMymvCGfkvS1DXQK/pagina.html
sorry can't imbed video as it's not the right type.
http://www.lastampa.it/2012/10/19/m...i-gheddafi-zRUnBDmMymvCGfkvS1DXQK/pagina.html
sorry can't imbed video as it's not the right type.
Heliobas Disciple
TB Fanatic
Beach, I found the comment you were referring to and edited my post above. Again, thanks for the head's up to another piece of the puzzle.
As for it all coming out? I was watching ABC Good Morning America this morning to see if any of this would be discussed. They opened with 4 stories as headlines, Sandy, the campaigns, shoplifting and Billy Idol singing for someone's birthday. I kid you not. I waited 20 minutes into the show to see if Libya would be discussed and it wasn't so I gave up and turned it off. So will it come out if most of the media is doing the job of the WH? I'm not so sure. And for the next week they will be concentrating on Sandy 24/7 - as if there's no news anywhere else. good way to bury the story even further. I do not have hopes this will see MSM before the election. Fox, internet bloggers, the radio talk shows (Beck, Rush, Hannity, Levin, etc) and CBS (surprisingly!) are the only ones on the story.
HD
As for it all coming out? I was watching ABC Good Morning America this morning to see if any of this would be discussed. They opened with 4 stories as headlines, Sandy, the campaigns, shoplifting and Billy Idol singing for someone's birthday. I kid you not. I waited 20 minutes into the show to see if Libya would be discussed and it wasn't so I gave up and turned it off. So will it come out if most of the media is doing the job of the WH? I'm not so sure. And for the next week they will be concentrating on Sandy 24/7 - as if there's no news anywhere else. good way to bury the story even further. I do not have hopes this will see MSM before the election. Fox, internet bloggers, the radio talk shows (Beck, Rush, Hannity, Levin, etc) and CBS (surprisingly!) are the only ones on the story.
HD
tiger13
Veteran Member
How do we NOT know Dennis? he is the only other choice besides Obama that we have that stands a viable chance of winning! Yes there are other choices to be had, but they just are a vote FOR Obama, and would put him in for 4 more years, and then the country is as good as gone. I would rather my vote go with the only other chance to save the country, and that would be with Romney, because I KNOW, from SEEING what the PAST 4 years were like, what 4 more years of Obama would be, but I cannot tell what 4 years of Romney would be like, and I would take my chances rather than go with the asshole Obama
I won't hold my breath waiting for the MSM, they're worthless. It'll be through the investigations after the election.
I hope.
Heliobas Disciple
TB Fanatic
More on General Ham. This is mind-blowing.
Last night on Sean Hannity, Congressman Jason Chaffetz said this:
"I can tell you though that I went to Libya. I visited with General Ham who is the four star general there in charge of the continent of Africa. I asked him if he had the capability, if he had the proximity, the answer was yes. But, I said, why didn't we act and he said because he wasn't asked to. Now he's a four star general, there aren't many people between him and the president. Somebody did not decide to take action."
Skip to 5:08:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JXbcrYNwFy8
Once again, here's what Panetta said in the NYT's article (posted in post 181 above). Here's a consistency check:
excerpts from: http://www.nytimes.com/2012/10/26/w...of-monitoring-situation-in-benghazi.html?_r=1
(fair use applies)
NOT CONSISTENT
If Ham told the congressman he was ready and able was not 'asked to' - it does not sound like he was in on a decision where they felt very strongly that they could not put forces at risk.
CONSISTENT
CONSISTENT
CONSISTENT, because it says the decision came from the Joint Staff in DC, ie: Dempsey made the call, not Ham. As Ham told the congressman, he was ready and able but was told not to act.
And now we see he has been replaced.
But there's more.
According to this article, Ham worked closely with Ambassador Stevens. All the more reason he would've wanted to come to his aid. And he was also outspoken about AQ in Libya leading up to the attack. This does sound like someone who would not have stood down.
http://security.blogs.cnn.com/2012/09/24/a-generals-warning-about-militants-in-libya/
(fair use applies)
A general's warning about militants in Libya
By Barbara Starr
September 24th, 2012
Just three months ago, the four-star chief of the U.S. Africa Command warned of a growing threat from al Qaeda and other militant groups in Libya.
"There is a real concern in Libya. As Libya is coming out of the revolution and forming its new government, there very clearly are those who wish to undermine the formation of that government," said Gen. Carter Ham in a speech to senior military and civilian officials from Africa, Europe and the U.S.
"We see some worrying indicators that al Qaeda and others are seeking to establish a presence in Libya," Ham warned. Ham often worked closely with the late Chris Stevens, the U.S. ambassador to Libya, killed in the attack on the U.S. consulate in Benghazi.
Ham has been trying to establish the initial stages of a military relationship with Libya, but the effort has been slowed by the presence and influence of armed militias, such as those suspected of being involved in the attack. Ham noted back in June the problem of bringing even more mainstream groups under the control of the central government.
"Now how do you bring those disparate organizations under some degree of central government control? How do you use those organizations to the benefit of the people? How do you transform some of them into border police, into national police, into maritime police and other areas of government where they can continue to be valuable contributors to overall Libyan security?"
Ham made much of the same case as early as February of this year in testimony before the House Armed Services Committee, when he testified that there were "some small pockets" of "foreign fighters" in Libya.
"There are remnants of that and there are indications that al Qaeda senior leadership is seeking to re-establish those networks, and that's one of the challenges that lays ahead for us."
As commander of U.S. military operations across Africa, Ham would be the senior U.S. officer in charge, if the president were to order a military strike against potential targets believed to be responsible for the attack. He is considered to be extremely knowledgeable about al Qaeda movements in Africa, as was Stevens.
Ham has particularly made the case that al Qaeda in the Lands of the Islamic Maghreb poses an increasing concern and that the group is operating unconstrained in a large portion of Mali and coordinating with other extremist elements across North Africa.
~~~~~
If you want to see or read the transcript of his speech go here:
video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cxOyYVFWxQs
transcript: http://www.africom.mil/getArticle.asp?art=8039&lang=0
another article about the speech: http://africacenter.org/2012/06/africom-ham-at-africa-center-seminar/
Last night on Sean Hannity, Congressman Jason Chaffetz said this:
"I can tell you though that I went to Libya. I visited with General Ham who is the four star general there in charge of the continent of Africa. I asked him if he had the capability, if he had the proximity, the answer was yes. But, I said, why didn't we act and he said because he wasn't asked to. Now he's a four star general, there aren't many people between him and the president. Somebody did not decide to take action."
Skip to 5:08:
Once again, here's what Panetta said in the NYT's article (posted in post 181 above). Here's a consistency check:
excerpts from: http://www.nytimes.com/2012/10/26/w...of-monitoring-situation-in-benghazi.html?_r=1
(fair use applies)
NOT CONSISTENT
If Ham told the congressman he was ready and able was not 'asked to' - it does not sound like he was in on a decision where they felt very strongly that they could not put forces at risk.
CONSISTENT
CONSISTENT
CONSISTENT, because it says the decision came from the Joint Staff in DC, ie: Dempsey made the call, not Ham. As Ham told the congressman, he was ready and able but was told not to act.
And now we see he has been replaced.
But there's more.
According to this article, Ham worked closely with Ambassador Stevens. All the more reason he would've wanted to come to his aid. And he was also outspoken about AQ in Libya leading up to the attack. This does sound like someone who would not have stood down.
http://security.blogs.cnn.com/2012/09/24/a-generals-warning-about-militants-in-libya/
(fair use applies)
A general's warning about militants in Libya
By Barbara Starr
September 24th, 2012
Just three months ago, the four-star chief of the U.S. Africa Command warned of a growing threat from al Qaeda and other militant groups in Libya.
"There is a real concern in Libya. As Libya is coming out of the revolution and forming its new government, there very clearly are those who wish to undermine the formation of that government," said Gen. Carter Ham in a speech to senior military and civilian officials from Africa, Europe and the U.S.
"We see some worrying indicators that al Qaeda and others are seeking to establish a presence in Libya," Ham warned. Ham often worked closely with the late Chris Stevens, the U.S. ambassador to Libya, killed in the attack on the U.S. consulate in Benghazi.
Ham has been trying to establish the initial stages of a military relationship with Libya, but the effort has been slowed by the presence and influence of armed militias, such as those suspected of being involved in the attack. Ham noted back in June the problem of bringing even more mainstream groups under the control of the central government.
"Now how do you bring those disparate organizations under some degree of central government control? How do you use those organizations to the benefit of the people? How do you transform some of them into border police, into national police, into maritime police and other areas of government where they can continue to be valuable contributors to overall Libyan security?"
Ham made much of the same case as early as February of this year in testimony before the House Armed Services Committee, when he testified that there were "some small pockets" of "foreign fighters" in Libya.
"There are remnants of that and there are indications that al Qaeda senior leadership is seeking to re-establish those networks, and that's one of the challenges that lays ahead for us."
As commander of U.S. military operations across Africa, Ham would be the senior U.S. officer in charge, if the president were to order a military strike against potential targets believed to be responsible for the attack. He is considered to be extremely knowledgeable about al Qaeda movements in Africa, as was Stevens.
Ham has particularly made the case that al Qaeda in the Lands of the Islamic Maghreb poses an increasing concern and that the group is operating unconstrained in a large portion of Mali and coordinating with other extremist elements across North Africa.
~~~~~
If you want to see or read the transcript of his speech go here:
video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cxOyYVFWxQs
transcript: http://www.africom.mil/getArticle.asp?art=8039&lang=0
another article about the speech: http://africacenter.org/2012/06/africom-ham-at-africa-center-seminar/
I saw an interview with the Chairman of the House Intelligence Committee say "Material is coming in 'over the transom' of both his committee and the Senate Intelligence Committee. "Over the transom" is an euphemism for leaks of information to the Committee.
At this stage, the intelligence community has made sure that the relevant committees have been made aware of what happened in Benghazi on Sept. 11th. Obama and company have just learned a vital lesson of government: "You don't urinate on leg of the intelligence community and expect to get away with it." When the Administration started blaming the intelligence community for giving them bad information the fate of the Zero Administration was sealed.
It couldn't happen to a nicer bunch of people!
Woolly
almost ready
Inactive
Here's another one for you. Now the Navy is replacing the Admiral in the Mideast Strike group. The buzz is that he sent help despite orders to the contrary and was relieved of duty. It is hinted in the article (cross posting this to two threads)
Navy replaces admiral leading Mideast strike group
WASHINGTON -- The Navy said Saturday it is replacing the admiral in command of an aircraft carrier strike group in the Middle East, pending the outcome of an internal investigation into undisclosed allegations of inappropriate judgment.
Rear Adm. Charles M. Gaouette is being sent back to the USS John C. Stennis' home port at Bremerton, Wash., in what the Navy called a temporary reassignment. The Navy said he is not formally relieved of his command of the Stennis strike group but will be replaced by Rear Adm. Troy M. Shoemaker, who will assume command until the investigation is completed.
It is highly unusual for the Navy to replace a carrier strike group commander during its deployment....
****
No wonder the White House is in a huddle. Next comes the Saturday night Massacre. Who do you think Obama will ask to fall on their swords for him? And will they?
Navy replaces admiral leading Mideast strike group
WASHINGTON -- The Navy said Saturday it is replacing the admiral in command of an aircraft carrier strike group in the Middle East, pending the outcome of an internal investigation into undisclosed allegations of inappropriate judgment.
Rear Adm. Charles M. Gaouette is being sent back to the USS John C. Stennis' home port at Bremerton, Wash., in what the Navy called a temporary reassignment. The Navy said he is not formally relieved of his command of the Stennis strike group but will be replaced by Rear Adm. Troy M. Shoemaker, who will assume command until the investigation is completed.
It is highly unusual for the Navy to replace a carrier strike group commander during its deployment....
****
No wonder the White House is in a huddle. Next comes the Saturday night Massacre. Who do you think Obama will ask to fall on their swords for him? And will they?
Would you fall on your sword for a guy that will likely lose on election day?
Heliobas Disciple
TB Fanatic
Thanks for the update. This is going to unravel on 0 and company now. They have tried to throw the military and the CIA under the bus. I'm not sure how long Panetta is going to be able to squash 'anonymous sources' who disclose even more info. For all we know, this rear admiral was the source for the Fox story. Timing makes sense... and the WH has already said it would act on any (UNFAVORABLE) leaks (THAT THEY DIDN'T THEMSELVES LEAK TO MAKE THEMSELVES LOOK GOOD).
HD
gawarriorqueen
WWG1WGA
If Hillary falls on her sword for 0, the only reason has got to be that she has been guaranteed the next open USSC seat. JMHO.
Dobbin
Faithful Steed
OMG!
She just might accept an offer like that.
Of course her legal underpinning are weak - but when did lack of knowledge and ability and experience ever get in the way of a political appointment?
Dobbin
Benghazi-gate reveals the Clintons we all remember…
Definitely good to monitor statements by Hillary (Bill) to read between the lines.
The latest is that she may "stay on" w/Zer0's State Dept. when WH Press Secretary
assumed she'd move on. Something big is in the air and it's not just Hurricane Sandy. The Clintons are masters of political intrigue and not accustomed to losing.
Ranger
link:http://granitegrok.com/blog/2012/10/benghazi-gate-reveals-the-clintons-we-all-remember
Brief article by Scott Morales with link to Examiner.
Benghazi-gate reveals the Clintons we all remember…
by Scott Morales
With their defense team assembled, the Clinton offensive begins. Of course this was prefigured by several Clinton observers (including fellow Groker Steve) because taking a political fall, whether they’re actually responsible for it or not, is anathema to their biology. That’s like asking Michael Moore to leave some Doritos in the bag. Or like asking bumbling, buffoon Biden to watch his mouth. Or like asking NOW to stick up for conservative women too. Or like asking me to stop with these silly repetitive similes! It ain’t gonna happen! The Clinton pair has slithered out of more conspicuous traps of their own design to play magnanimous and allow themselves to be ensnared by someone else’s. Especially, by one of his.
From the Examiner:
Clinton asked for more security in Benghazi, Obama said no
Last night, it was revealed that Secretary of State Hillary Clinton had ordered more security at the U.S. mission in Benghazi before it was attacked where four Americans, including U.S. Ambassador Christopher Stevens were murdered by Al-Qaeda but President Obama denied the request.
The news broke on TheBlazeTV’s “Wilkow!” hosted by Andrew Wilkow, by best-selling author, Ed Klein who said the legal counsel to Clinton had informed him of this information.
Definitely good to monitor statements by Hillary (Bill) to read between the lines.
The latest is that she may "stay on" w/Zer0's State Dept. when WH Press Secretary
assumed she'd move on. Something big is in the air and it's not just Hurricane Sandy. The Clintons are masters of political intrigue and not accustomed to losing.
Ranger
link:http://granitegrok.com/blog/2012/10/benghazi-gate-reveals-the-clintons-we-all-remember
Brief article by Scott Morales with link to Examiner.
Benghazi-gate reveals the Clintons we all remember…
by Scott Morales
With their defense team assembled, the Clinton offensive begins. Of course this was prefigured by several Clinton observers (including fellow Groker Steve) because taking a political fall, whether they’re actually responsible for it or not, is anathema to their biology. That’s like asking Michael Moore to leave some Doritos in the bag. Or like asking bumbling, buffoon Biden to watch his mouth. Or like asking NOW to stick up for conservative women too. Or like asking me to stop with these silly repetitive similes! It ain’t gonna happen! The Clinton pair has slithered out of more conspicuous traps of their own design to play magnanimous and allow themselves to be ensnared by someone else’s. Especially, by one of his.
From the Examiner:
Clinton asked for more security in Benghazi, Obama said no
Last night, it was revealed that Secretary of State Hillary Clinton had ordered more security at the U.S. mission in Benghazi before it was attacked where four Americans, including U.S. Ambassador Christopher Stevens were murdered by Al-Qaeda but President Obama denied the request.
The news broke on TheBlazeTV’s “Wilkow!” hosted by Andrew Wilkow, by best-selling author, Ed Klein who said the legal counsel to Clinton had informed him of this information.
Tennessee gal
Veteran Member
You may be right, but for some reason I just don't see her doing it. The Clintons are way to savey not to save their own political power
Dobbin
Faithful Steed
Except that Hil is an ideologue - and would like nothing better than to rewrite the Constitution in more Marxist terms.
She intends to leave her mark - and her time and situation for a political mark is growing short. She might settle for an "interpretative" mark.
Dobbin
mbabulldog
Inactive
she'll never do it, because if she does that she will fail Senate Confirmation MISERABLY...
"Mrs. Clinton, you admitted your poor judgement contributed to the death of four Americans; please tell us why we should believe you'll show good judgement on The Bench?"