Southbound I-495 bridge open, NB still closed



WDEL Blog: Allan Loudell

Benghazi hearing: Three State Dept. officials dispute Administration's narrative of the attacks

A trio of State Department officials offered a House committee intense accounts of last year's deadly attack on U.S. installations in Benghazi, Libya

The officials again criticized the Obama Administration's early hesitation to characterize the attacks as premeditated terrorist acts. Again, questions about whether then-Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clintom and her top aides were sufficiently engaged.

The key revelation (at least to me): The deputy to the slain U.S. ambassador said a team of Special Forces was preparing to fly to Benghazi, but got a red light from the U.S. Special Operations Command in Africa. Why?

(Preliminary answer: No air-to-air refueling to get F15s at Aviano U.S. Air Base in Italy to Benghazi and back!)

Republicans portrayed an Obama Administration intent on cover-up; Dems accused the Republicans of exploiting a real tragedy for political gain (Doesn't hurt GOP'ers to beat up the presumed Democratic Presidential frontrunner for 2016: Hillary Rodham Clinton)

In the end, it's doubtful very many minds were changed.

As for the broader American public, Benghazi simply is not the sort of thing ordinary people talk about at the office water-cooler.

It didn't help that the Cleveland abduction story - with its hour-by-hour twists & turns - and then the 1st-degree murder verdict in the Jodi Arias trial - eclipsed Benghazi and dominated the popular media.

The basic questions persist: Did the Obama Administration fully grasp the magnitude of the situation? Did it do everything it could to save U.S. lives? What explains the discrepancy about whether any team was preparing to fly to Benghazi, but then was forbidden from doing do? Did senior aides cover up? Or is this primarily a Republican fishing expedition designed to tarnish not only the Obama Administration, but the likely Democratic Presidential nominee in particular?

It does appear the Administration realized early on that the Benghazi assault was a terrorist attack, even though the Administration waffled on its public remarks. And there HAS been public obfuscation.

CBS News investigative correspondent Sharyl Attkisson has told me about her frustrations trying to get to the bottom of the Benghazi story, including government rejections of her FOIA requests. Previously, she revealed how she was shouted and yelled at for her inquiries into the "Fast & Furious" gun-running scandal. (Politico reported April 12th that the Emmy award-winning investigative journalist was in talks to leave CBS News ahead of the expiration of her contract and that she had been feuding with CBS News executives, particularly the executive producer of the "CBS Evening News"; Attkisson said in a statement she'd remain with the network for the duration of her contract.)

Of the two dozen or so news accounts I've seen of yesterday's Benghazi hearing and the political fallout, I recommend this from ROLL CALL: "5 Top Moments of the Benghazi Hearing"...


http://blogs.rollcall.com/goppers/5-best-moments-of-the-benghazi-hearing/

Posted at 8:20am on May 9, 2013 by Allan Loudell

<- Back to all Allan Loudell posts



Comments on this post:

kavips
Thu, May 9, 2013 8:48am
Lol. I just commented on another thread here that Benghazi hearings have a very low profile in all the new aggregates today, most not mentioning it at all...

Check a look around. Last night, the top 5 had nothing. Today only three of the top five have anything at all.. and they are very far down at the bottom.

kavips
Thu, May 9, 2013 8:54am
I just looked at Fox. Very minimal coverage there... I was kinda surprised it wasn't spread across the front page....

So if Fox doesn't think a story that was created for Fox to publish is news, it is not news...

It happened, but is it worth anyone's time to comment upon it? Can we have another topic please?

teatime
Thu, May 9, 2013 9:37am
Clinton and Obama clearly screwed-up on Benghazi. They turned down requests for extra security before the attack, and that, in all likelihood, cost four American lives.

Interestingly, during the second presidential debate in the "Town Hall" format, a citizen asked Obama why he didn't respond to requests for additional Benghazi security, and Obama then went into a long narrative about how the U.S. turfed Osama Bin Laden.

Clinton, Obama and the entire administration continue to duck questions about Benghazi because they know the truth will show an administration that was AWOL during a deadly crisis.




EarlGrey
Thu, May 9, 2013 10:53am
If something like Benghazi or Fast & Furious happened under GW43 I believe both stories would have had the media screaming impeachment.

The biggest revelation of these hearings to me was that the reason there were 30 survivors is because two ex-Navy SEALS (who died along with the Ambassador) ignored orders to stand down, attempted to defend Stevens and successfully saved those who did make it out alive.

Sharyl Attkisson is one of a very small number of real reporters...digging for the truth, uncovering the lies, and exposing them to whomever will pay attention.

kavips
Thu, May 9, 2013 1:22pm
Far more important on the news blotter is this local story: Down in Felton four dogs perished from gas caused by leaking propane inside the home...

http://www.delawareonline.com/article/20130509/NEWS/305090073

The WDEL version does not mention the dead dogs...

http://www.wdel.com/story.php?id=50845

This is a cover-up. We must have an investigation immediately, on why, why, in the heat of the moment, WDEL is not reporting the dogs that gave their lives to gas. This is an outrage, outrage. We must have hearings: 9 of them in fact, we must have testimony and hear from 100 witnesses... By everything American, we must get to the bottom of this... Why on earth we are covering-up the deaths of four dogs? FOUR DOGS DIED... Where's the outrage? Where's the law? We need impeachment. We need to remove all those responsible! Four dogs died I say you.. and who was president? We need to remove him. Four dogs died. It is the president's responsibility.. He is in charge of this nation. And I bet you, he called WDEL and demanded no mention of the dogs gets out.. I bet you for sure. There can be no other reason WDEL didn't mention it. And the next president, probably that woman, will also be responsible for this. Simply because they too must not like dogs. Forget all the reasons.. It's a conspiracy and President Obama is responsible for those four dogs dying because I say so. If I say so, it must be. Stop trying to use facts or data to make it look like just a house blew up... It's a conspiracy I tell you. You can tell because WDEL didn't report the dead dogs and the News Journal did.... Something is not right. Call your congressmen, call your priest, sound the general alarm. Our nation is under attack. It's the end of the United States of America... And you know? You Know? You want me to prove there is a conspiracy against the truth? Just you wait till Sunday, just wait till Sunday. On Sunday, I guarantee you, I'll bet you, I'll triple double-dog-dare you... that there will be no mention of this on all of Sunday's televised talk show. Not one word!

It has to be a conspiracy, I tell you. This conspiracy far dwarfs those talks in Benghazi in scope. This conspiracy may actually take down President Obama himself and ............ leave us with Joe Biden as commander-in-chief.

Allan Loudell
Thu, May 9, 2013 2:12pm
kavips...

Appreciate your sarcasm!

I can tell you a particular NEWS JOURNAL reporter - very passionate about animals - argued (successfully) with her colleagues and editor that fire stories should note if any pets perished, even if no humans did.

That said, I would argue it's a cover-up when the deaths of dogs and/or cats are noted & documented, but not "lesser" pets such as tropical fish!

Allan Loudell

glass1/2full
Thu, May 9, 2013 2:38pm
Fear not, kavips, the mid-tier(?) pundits (no, I do not tune in; I co-habit with someone who does), and, oh alright, Rush,too, are covering Benghazi more than enough to satisfy anyone. A question for you: some weeks ago, you posted a link to a report of the Benghazi event being a retaliation to a prior attack by "us". I neglected to follow that and have been unable to find info. Do you still have the link? Or any other info? Thanks.

kavips
Thu, May 9, 2013 2:39pm
Lol.. but on a technicality, the fish wouldn't have died by being burned but instead their cause would be death by boiling. Since boiled fish is common, this perhaps is less newsworthy and therefore could be excused as being non discriminatory if left out of the News Journal story..

kavips
Thu, May 9, 2013 2:52pm
Glass... it came from the book. 'Benghazi: The Definitive Report' written by Jack Murphy/Brandon Webb

http://www.amazon.com/Benghazi-The-Definitive-Report/dp/B00BWTIBIG/ref=sr_1_sc_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1368125298&sr=8-1-spell&keywords=benghazi+the+defininitve+report

Murphy and co-author Brandon Webb also revealed that the September 11 Benghazi terrorist attack that killed four Americans, including Ambassador Chris Stevens, was retaliation by Islamist militants who had been targeted by covert U.S. military operations.

The book claims that neither Stevens nor even Petraeus knew about the raids by American special operations troops, which had 'kicked a hornet's nest' among the heavily-armed fighters after the overthrow of Libyan dictator Muammar Gaddafi.

John Brennan, President Barack Obama's Deputy National Security Adviser, had been authorizing 'unilateral operations in North Africa outside of the traditional command structure,' according to the e-book.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2276139/David-Petraeus-CIA-directors-bodyguards-exposed-affair-Paula-Broadwell-claims-Benghazi-The-Definitive-Report.html#axzz2KW3pmUXm






EarlGrey
Thu, May 9, 2013 3:49pm
One possibilty for the slow action from Hillary (and/or Obama) is that an agreement banning the use of U.S. special forces, or U.S. military force in general, for certain parts of Libya had been negotiated between the Obama administration and the Libyan government after Gaddafi was overthrown.

Even if there was an agreement, shouldn't they have done something to save the Ambassador and all the others at that compound?

I wonder...would we even know about Benghazi had there been no survivors? Kinda' doubt it.

glass1/2full
Thu, May 9, 2013 4:17pm
thanks, kavips

mrpizza
Fri, May 10, 2013 12:26am
This event trumps Watergate, Iran-Contra, Iraq, Monica Lewinsky, or any other scandal you want to name.

Clearly Obama and Hillary should be tried and convicted of treason and given life sentences in Leavenworth and sent out daily to pick up trash off highways.

kavips
Fri, May 10, 2013 8:13am
Mr. Pizza... either you've gone postal or been sniffing the dough... :)

EarlGrey
Fri, May 10, 2013 11:05am
Whoever was responsible for leaving the Ambassador and all others defenseless in Benghazi should indeed be given mrpizza's penalties.

EarlGrey
Fri, May 10, 2013 11:09am
Has anyone found out who it was that placed stand-down orders twice for support to Benghazi?

kavips
Sat, May 11, 2013 1:55am
Earl Grey. It was Darrell Issa. those stand down orders came when he terminated all funding for embassy security.

btw. whats going on in Cleveland, has much more to do with national security than these hearings... Which is .. none at all...

EarlGrey
Sun, May 12, 2013 3:33pm
Funny...I thought the security was reduced thanks to Hillary (even after Ambassador Stevens pleaded for more security after 5 previous Terrorist attacks in the Benghazi region against "foreign interests".)

Now that ABC News actually did some reporting and revealed the 12 revisions to the Benghazi talking points...others who mocked are looking into a cover-up...even the New Yorker (not very right-wing) is changing its position on this one.
http://www.newyorker.com/online/blogs/newsdesk/2013/05/benghazi-cia-talking-point-edits-white-house.html?mobify=0

Another interesting story is the IRS admission of going after Tea Party, Conservative, and Jewish organizations and individuals...so much for the paranoid who said this has been happening for quite a while (just as Nixon had an enemies list so too does our current leader).


kavips
Mon, May 13, 2013 9:12am
Oh stop it...

http://abcnews.go.com/images/Politics/Benghazi%20Talking%20Points%20Timeline.pdf

here are the alterations...
Where is the scandal?

Only a complete idiot, an imbecile, a dumb businessman, a horrible human being, a disgruntled demon, a vandalized vixen, a putrid potatohead, would think these revisions were dastardly. For example... One of the most horrible, horrible, traitorous, impeachable twelve revisions, has one single word changed... One word!!!

That word.... .... .... Cairo.... yes, Cairo... This is an outrage! Impeach the President! Impeach the Vice President! Impeach every Democrat! It is treason. It calls for removing "that" black man from office. In fact, it calls for all protocol to be eviscerated, and Darrel Issa to be sworn-in as President.. Nothing else can save the country. We must act now! We need to do something right now to make Darrell Issa, and only Darrel Issa, twice arrested on car theft, once accused of putting a gun to an employee's head, always accused of distorting truth to benefit his career, into the next President of the United States of America... Quick! .. Sound the alarm! Call your friends. Write your grandmother a hand-written letter!.... Our country is under attack!!! .

Cairo... was changed...

My guess, it was changed because if you read without it, there was ambiguity as to which embassay. Was it the embassy of Tripoli? Or perhaps without it, some might even get the impression they were discussing Benghazi itself?...

Once again, it is the news that is the hype. Not the articles inside... WE are reporting that someone who gains from any insinuation of impropriety, is "saying" this is an outrage, Not whether or not it is one..

I noticed that ABC, which has the document, was very specific not to "say" the document says anything bad... Very specific. They know,.... the document says nothing bad, and now if you read it... we all know what they know...

It is amazing what one can find out on their own, if they don't listen to Goebbels...

This makes the Republicans look like the stupidest people who have ever graced the face of the earth... I wonder how many called off work today, embarrassed to show their face?

kavips
Mon, May 13, 2013 9:13am
Mr. Pizza.. Did you show up to work today? :)

kavips
Mon, May 13, 2013 9:18am
And just for a matter of record, I do more revisions on my answers to WDEL's Allan Loudell's blog than these guys did for 5 Sunday talk shows...

Come on Republicans... Get a life...

EarlGrey
Mon, May 13, 2013 9:49am
kavips: Did billsmith hack your user account? Your response was a bit snarky.

http://abcnews.go.com/images/Politics/Benghazi%20Talking%20Points%20Timeline.pdf

Did you read the link you posted from ABC News?
Al-Qaida and all references to terrorism were removed and the YouTube video story was inserted...The 5 previous attacks in Benghazi (including the British Ambassador) were also scrubbed. How can you not see this scandal? Too loyal to Obama or fear of losing Hillary in 2016?

kavips
Tue, May 14, 2013 2:50pm
Earl... The truth always looks snarky when you are on the wrong side of it.


Add your comment:
Attention: In an attempt to promote a level of civility and personal responsibility in blog discussions, we now require you to be a member of the WDEL Members Only Group in order to post a comment. Your Members Only Group username and password are required to process your post.

You can join the WDEL Members Only Group for free by clicking here.
If you are already a member but have forgotten your username or password, please click here.

Please register your post with your WDEL Members Only Group username and password below.
Username:
Password:
Comment:
 










Copyright © 2014, Delmarva Broadcasting Company. All Rights Reserved.   Terms of Use.
WDEL Statement of Equal Employment Opportunity and Outreach