Tag: BenghaziGate

BenghaziGate: The “I’m Rubber, You’re Glue” Defense

On By kingsjesterIn Politics1 Comment

The latest “But…but…they did it ,too!” Defensive Strategy from the Democrats,  concerning the unabashed lies told by this Administration and its spokesperson, Susan Rice, regarding the murder of 4 brave Americans on 9/11/12, on the ground of the American Consulate in Benghazi, Libya, is an attempt to President George W. Bush’s claiming that there were WMDs in Iraq with the Obama Administration’s numerous bald-faced lies blaming an un-watched Youtube video for the Middle Eastern Riots on 9/11/12.

The Democrats’ claim doesn’t hold water.

From the New York Post:

There were weapons of mass destruction in Iraq after all.

The massive cache of almost 400,000 Iraq war documents released by the WikiLeaks Web site revealed that small amounts of chemical weapons were found in Iraq and continued to surface for years after the 2003 US invasion, Wired magazine reported.

The documents showed that US troops continued to find chemical weapons and labs for years after the invasion, including remnants of Saddam Hussein’s chemical weapons arsenal — most of which had been destroyed following the Gulf War.

In August 2004, American troops were able to buy containers from locals of what they thought was liquid sulfur mustard, a blister agent, the documents revealed. The chemicals were triple-sealed and taken to a secure site.

Also in 2004, troops discovered a chemical lab in a house in Fallujah during a battle with insurgents. A chemical cache was also found in the city.

Regarding BenghaziGate, Susan Rice had a lot to say yesterday, in her meeting with Senators McCain, Graham, and Ayotte. It was a meeting that did nothing by leave the Senators feeling more uncomfortable about the quadruple murder at the Consulate, than when they began the meeting.

Susan E. Rice may have hoped that paying a conciliatory call on three hostile Senate Republicans on Tuesday would smooth over a festering dispute about the deadly attack on the American diplomatic mission in Benghazi, Libya, and clear a roadblock to her nomination as secretary of state.

“If you think these three Senators walked in with open minds and no agenda, I’d like to sell you a bridge that crosses the East River into Brooklyn. McCain’s little kangaroo court is about as transparent as his anger.”

But the senators seemed anything but mollified, signaling instead that they would still oppose Ms. Rice, the ambassador to the United Nations, if she is nominated by President Obama, even after she conceded errors in the account of the assault she gave on Sunday morning television programs shortly after it occurred in September.

Two of the Republicans, Lindsey Graham of South Carolina and Kelly Ayotte of New Hampshire, said they would seek to block Ms. Rice, who according to administration officials remains Mr. Obama’s preferred choice to succeed Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton. The third Republican, Senator John McCain of Arizona, said on Fox that he would be “very hard-pressed” to support Ms. Rice.

“Bottom line, I’m more disturbed than I was before,” Mr. Graham said after the tense, closed-door meeting.

The continued criticism of Ms. Rice, 48, a diplomat with close ties to Mr. Obama, deepens an already bitter and unusually personal feud between the White House and Republicans over Libya. Responding to a question about criticism of Ms. Rice at a news conference two weeks ago, Mr. Obama said, “If Senator McCain and Senator Graham and others want to go after somebody, they should go after me.”

It also raises the prospect of a confirmation battle if the president goes ahead with nominating Ms. Rice. To some extent, that battle is already under way, even before he has submitted her name. Ms. Rice’s visits to senators, which will continue Wednesday, bear all the hallmarks of a presidential nominee seeking to win over reluctant lawmakers.

A senior administration official said the harsh reaction to Ms. Rice’s appearance on Tuesday would have no effect on her chances for secretary of state. “They’ve been saying the same thing for months,” he said.

Senator John Kerry, Democrat of Massachusetts and the chairman of the Foreign Relations Committee, is the other leading candidate for the post. Several senators, including Mr. McCain, said they would prefer Mr. Kerry and predicted that he would sail through a confirmation hearing.

In a statement after the meeting, Ms. Rice said she incorrectly described the attack in Benghazi, which killed Ambassador J. Christopher Stevens and three other Americans, as a spontaneous protest gone awry rather than a premeditated terrorist attack. But she said she based her remarks on the intelligence then available — intelligence that changed over time.

That’s called “lying”, ma’am.

Those Senators should not rest until they find out who issued the “Stand Down” order on that fateful night, leading to the murders of those brave Americans.

As Americans, we must not relent in seeking the truth in this rapidly evolving scandal.

No matter how many revisions to their initial lie-filled explanation of the attack that they offer.

President Harry S. Truman had a sign on his desk in the Oval Office that said, “The Buck Stops here.”

I firmly believe that President Barack Hussein Obama has one on his desk that says, “It’s Not My Fault.”

BenghaziGate: “Video?” “What Video?”

On By kingsjesterIn Politics3 Comments

General David Petraeus, Former Director of the CIA, may very well be the one person that this Administration can not intimidate into silence, concerning Benghazigate.

Foxnews.com reports on yesterday’s closed door questioning of the General:

Former CIA Director David Petraeus stoked the controversy over the Obama administration’s handling of the Libya terror attack, testifying Friday that references to “Al Qaeda involvement” were stripped from his agency’s original talking points — while other intelligence officials were unable to say who changed the memo, according to a top lawmaker who was briefed.

Rep. Peter King, R-N.Y., told Fox News that intelligence officials who testified in a closed-door hearing a day earlier, including Director of National Intelligence James Clapper and Acting CIA Director Mike Morell, said they did not know who changed the talking points. He said they went out to multiple departments, including the State Department, National Security Council, Justice Department and White House.

“To me the question right now is who changed those talking points and why. … I’d say it was somebody in the administration had to have taken it out,” King told Fox News. “That, to me, has to be pursued.”

Petraeus left Capitol Hill around noon, after testifying in private hearings before the House and Senate intelligence committees. In his wake, Republicans and Democrats battled over whether his testimony should raise more suspicions about the administration’s handling of the attack.

King and other Republicans indicated they still have plenty of questions about the aftermath of the strike.

“No one knows yet exactly who came up with the final version of the talking points,” he said.

Considering the lies and misdirection that have been given out by Obama and his minions  since the murder of those 4 Americans at the Consulate in Benghazi, Rep. King, getting the truth out of that bunch will be as hard as getting Lindsey Lohan to stay sober.

Here is a timeline, published by Fox News which cleary demonstrates the Administration’s explanation of how the events on 9/11/12 happened has “evolved”:

White House

President Obama, speaking in the Rose Garden on Sept. 12, referred to “acts of terror” as he condemned the attack. But later that day, when asked in an interview with CBS whether he thought the attack was terrorism, Obama said “it’s too early to tell exactly how this came about.”

On Sept. 14, Press Secretary Jay Carney said “we have no information to suggest that it was a preplanned attack.” He continued to link the attack to protests over an anti-Islam film.

On Sept. 19, National Counterterrorism Center Director Matt Olsen testified that the strike was a “terrorist attack.”

On Sept. 20, during an interview with Univision, Obama again declined to label the attack terrorism. “I don’t want to speak to something until we have all the information,” he said.

However, that same day, Carney acknowledged it is “self-evident that what happened in Benghazi was a terrorist attack.”

Obama and the White House would later claim they labeled the attack terrorism from the start.

State Department

On Sept. 12, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton said the U.S. was “working to determine the precise motivations and methods” of the attackers, while citing the protest in Cairo over the anti-Islam film.

The following day, State Department spokeswoman Victoria Nuland said the department was “very cautious about drawing any conclusions” about who was behind the attack and what the motivations were.

On Sept. 16, despite emerging evidence that the attack involved at least some pre-planning, U.S. Ambassador to the U.N. Susan Rice went on five Sunday shows to claim it was spontaneous.

“The information, the best information and the best assessment we have today is that in fact this was not a preplanned, premeditated attack. That what happened initially was that it was a spontaneous reaction to what had just transpired in Cairo as a consequence of the video,” she said on “Fox News Sunday.”

The next day, Nuland was asked if the department regarded the strike as terrorism, and she said “I don’t think we know enough.”

On Sept. 21, Clinton used the “terrorist attack” label to describe the assault.

Intelligence community

On Sept. 14, Petraeus gave a briefing to lawmakers in which, according to sources, he stressed the link between the anti-Islam film and the Libya attack — and played down the involvement of terrorist groups.

On Sept. 28, Director of National Intelligence James Clapper’s office issued a detailed statement. In it, the DNI said initial information led the office “to assess that the attack began spontaneously following protests earlier that day” in Cairo, and that information was provided to members of the Executive Branch and Congress.

But, the office said: “As we learned more about the attack, we revised our initial assessment to reflect new information indicating that it was a deliberate and organized terrorist attack carried out by extremists.”

On Oct. 19, the story changed again. An intelligence official circulated a revised version of events, acknowledging “extremist” elements were likely involved but claiming “the bulk of available information supports the early assessment that the attackers launched their assault opportunistically after they learned about the violence at the U.S. Embassy in Cairo.”

On Nov. 16, Petraeus testified on Capitol Hill in closed-door hearings that he suspected from the start that the attack was terrorism. According to Rep. Peter King, R-N.Y., he told lawmakers that the CIA’s original assessment pointed to “Al Qaeda involvement,” but that the line was later removed.

“Political language… is designed to make lies sound truthful and murder respectable, and to give an appearance of solidity to pure wind.” – George Orwell

All the American public wants, is the truth, Mr. President. Those 4 men and their families deserve no less.

Proverbs 6:16-19

These six things doth the LORD hate: yea, seven are an abomination unto him: A proud look, a lying tongue, and hands that shed innocent blood, An heart that deviseth wicked imaginations, feet that be swift in running to mischief, A false witness that speaketh lies, and he that soweth discord among brethren.

Until he comes,

KJ

BenghaziGate: “And, When We Get Behind Closed Doors…”

On By kingsjesterIn Politics4 Comments

Regarding BenghaziGate, it appears some Moderate Republicans are growing a spine…and President Obama doesn’t like it one bit:

“Mr. President, don’t think for one minute I don’t hold you ultimately responsible for Benghazi. I think you failed as Commander in Chief before, during, and after the attack,” said Lindsey Graham, South Carolina Republican.

The exchange came after Mr. Graham and Sen. John McCain said they would try to block Ms. Rice if Mr. Obama tapped her to become secretary of state. They said she hasn’t done an exemplary job in her current post as ambassador to the U.N., and also said she has damaged her credibility because she inaccurately blamed the Sept. 11 terrorist attack in Benghazi on a mob protest.

Mr. Obama, in a press conference, angrily said his critics should instead go after him, and said Ms. Rice was only acting on behalf of the White House.

“She made an appearance at the request of the White House in which she gave her best understanding of the intelligence that had been provided to her. If Senator McCain and Senator Graham and others want to go after somebody, they should go after me,” he said. “And I’m happy to have that discussion with them. But for them to go after the U.N. ambassador, who had nothing to do with Benghazi and was simply making a presentation based on intelligence that she had received and to besmirch her reputation is outrageous.”

You mean, you actually want to discuss the fact that she, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, Leon Panetta, and you, all lied to the world, by blaming the Muslim Riots in the Middle East, and the murder of 4 Americans at the Benghazi Consulate on a stupid  Youtube Video, which no one had ever seen?

Maybe, you were just upset that your former Director of the CIA, General David Petraeus, is going to be testify about the whole bloody mess, behind closed doors:

Gen. David Petraeus will testify before a House Committee on the Libya embassy attack Friday morning, despite the ongoing FBI investigation into an extramarital affair that led to his resignation as director of the CIA.

The hearing held by the Senate Intelligence Committee is closed to the public and the media. Petraeus is expected to answer questions about the CIA’s knowledge and handling of the assault on the U.S. Consulate in Benghazi that left U.S. Ambassador Chris Stevens and three other Americans dead. Two of those Americans were with the CIA.

It was unclear at first whether or not Petraeus would testify as planned, after he abruptly resigned from the agency amid news of his affair with biographer Broadwell. Five days ago, the Senate Intelligence Committee said the retired General would skip the hearing.

Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-Calf., said Wednesday that Petraeus “willing and interested” to talk to the committee, CBS News’ Stephanie Condon reported earlier Wednesday.

“It’s just on Benghazi. Our hearings are on Benghazi and the intelligence that preceded Benghazi and the intelligence that determined security,” she told reporters.

Congressional investigators get access to telegrams, intelligence reports, and classified emails as they interview top security and Pentagon officials. Sources tell CBS News’ Margaret Brennan that intelligence officials will show footage from an unmanned surveillance drone that was overhead during the assault.

The Senate Foreign Relations Committee, which has oversight of the State Department, has already been briefed about the attack by Under Secretary Patrick Kennedy and Assistant Secretary for Diplomatic Security Eric Boswell.

Dr, Charles Krauthammer was on Special Report on Fox News the other day. He offered his insights on General Petraeus’ situation:

I think the really shocking news today was that General Petraeus thought and hoped he could keep his job. He thought it could be kept secret and that he would stay in his position. I think what that tells us is really important. It meant that he understood that the FBI obviously knew what was going on. He was hoping that those administration officials would not disclose what would happen and therefore hoping he would keep his job. And that meant that he understood that his job, his reputation, his legacy, his whole celebrated life was in the hands of the administration, and he expected they would protect him by keeping it quiet.

And that brings us to the ultimate I was, his testimony on September 13. That is the thing that connects the scandals and the only thing that makes the sex scandal relevant. Otherwise it would be exercise in sensationalism and voyeurism and nothing else.

The reason it is important is here a man who knows the administration holds his fate in his hands and he gives testimony completely at variance with what the secretary of defense had said the day before, at variance with what he heard from his station chief in Tripoli and with everything that we had heard. Was he influenced by the fact he knew his fate was held by people in the administration at that time?

Perhaps, the important question is: Is he going to man up, do the right thing, speak the truth and shame the Devil, concerning BenghaziGate? Or, is he going to keep his mouth shut and take one for the team?

Ambassador Chris Stevens, Tyrone Woods, Glen Doherty, and Sean Smith remain unavailable for comment.

Obama II: The Return of the Lyin’ King

On By kingsjesterIn Politics3 Comments

One week ago today, the American people voted for a myth. No, I’m not talking about Santa Claus. Santa’s real.

I’m referring to the Manchurian President, Barack Hussein Obama (mm mmm mmmm).

The past week, as Conservative Americans have been catching all kinds of H -E – Double Hockey Sticks from both the Democratic and Republican Parties, with suggestions that we have to “evolve” and become either Moderate squishes or full-blown Liberals, the whole country has been witness to the discovery of voting anomalies  such as 141% voting turnout in St. Lucie Country, Florida resulting in a recount in Rep. Allen West’s race.

And, yesterday, we heard that 59 precincts in the City of Brotherly Love, Philadelphia, had no votes cast at all for Mitt Romney.

Weren’t these the areas that evicted Republican poll watchers, who, in turn had to get a court order, so that they could return to the polls and do their jobs?

Something smells…bad. Not just bad…downright evil.

And, then, there’s the little matter of “BenghaziGate”, which started out with the President of the United States lying in front of the American People, and, later the world, at the UN General Assembly, claiming that an anti-Muslim video, which no one had ever seen, was responsible for multiple uprisings across the Middle east, on a day, which just happened to be the 11th Anniversary of the worst (Islamic) Terrorist attack ever on American soil.

If you still believe, as the fellow who produces the morning news on the Memphis CBS affiliate evidently does, that an un-watched video caused the Muslim attacks in the Middle East on that day, then I have some used Sea Monkeys to sell you. (Trust me. They always float on top of the water like that.)

Now, what started out as a quadruple murder of Americans at the Benghazi Consulate has morphed from a bald-faced lie into a soap opera, with the abrupt and unexpected resignation of the Director of the CIA, General David Petraeus.

Patraeus, who had been married to his wife Holly for 37 years, has admitted to having an affair with Paul Broadwell, his biographer. Yesterday, we learned that the FBI had been investigating him and his paramour, but mysteriously stopped their probe 4 days before the election. They claimed that they were making sure that Petraeus did not start fooling around with Ms. Broadwell, until after he left the Military.

By the way, Ms. Boardwell actually wrecked two homes. She is/was married, and is the mother of 2.

What got the FBI involved in the first place, were threatening e-mails MS. Broadwell sent to another woman, telling her to leave “her man” alone. The female in question, Jill Kelley, a supporter of the Military from Florida, who along with her husband and family, has spent past Christmases with the General and Holly Petraeus.

We also found out that the initial agent, who started the probe, had become enamored of Ms. Kelley, and was sending shirtless pictures of his himself via e-mails to her. (It could have been worse. He could have done an Anthony Weiner impersonation.)

As an aside, my ex-father-in-law, a retired Memphis Police Lt, said that the initials “FBI” stood for ______ing Bunch of Idiots. You can use your imaginations to fill in the blank.

Also, last night, we learned that the FBI had conducted a search of Ms. Broadwell’s home. The reason? During the day yesterday, it was learned that Ms. Broadwell had reported that 2 Libyan Muslim Prisoners had been kept and interrogated at the Benghazi Consulate, which the CIA has denied…of course.

That might have had a little to do with the Terrorist raid on the Consulate, don’t you think, Mr. President?

The FBI was also very curious as to where she got her information on the comings and goings of high level Generals and other officials.

In a related matter,  General John Allen, the top American Commander in Afghanistan, who was revealed overnight to be under investigations for “inappropriate communications” with Jill Kelly.

Oh, what a tangled web we weave…

Also, word also came out yesterday, that Rep. Eric Cantor found out about the sordid affair, 2 weeks before Petraeus resigned. The story is, he sent an aide to tell Director Mueller of the FBI, but Hurricane Sandy somehow held up the information from getting through.(?)

Petraeus resigned just days away from an appearance on Capitol Hill, in front of a Senate Sub-committee investigating Benghazigate.  Michael Morell, the acting Director of the CIA, is scheduled to testify in his place, which does not please the folks up on Capitol Hill one bit.

With Secretary of State Clinton and President Obama both unavailable, due to trips out of the country (how convenient), it looks like, as I wrote yesterday, the Committee is getting the ol’ Washington Two-Step.

Y’know, if you read all the self-proclaimed political pundits on the internet, they all say that this soap opera will fizzle out eventually, that Americans are not interested in it, and that it really does not matter that 4 Americans were murdered in Benghazi.

Of course, these are some of the same opinionated individuals who say that “Social (Reagan) Conservatives are passe”, and, that we must “evolve”.

Funny, though. They also admonish those of us who follow Christ, telling us that we are busybodies, and, what goes on between consenting adults does not affect any one else.

Well…the General’s and Ms. Broadwell’s actions could affect our whole nation’s security.

Shoots that argument all to Blazes, doesn’t it?

Until He comes,

KJ

BenghaziGate: The Ol’ Washington Two-Step

On By kingsjesterIn Politics2 Comments

It appears that Congress is receiving the ol’ Washington two-step in their attempts to try to find out what really happened on 9/11/12 at the Benghazi Consulate Compound.

Lawmakers on both sides of the aisle have questions for former CIA Director David H. Petraeus about the Sept. 11 terrorist attack on the U.S. Consulate in Benghazi, Libya, his recently disclosed extramarital affair and other issues — but their queries will have to wait for a later date.

Acting CIA Director Michael Morrell will testify Thursday in closed-door hearings of the Senate and House intelligence committees instead of Mr. Petraeus, who resigned abruptly last week after admitting he had an extramarital affair.

…Intelligence committee leaders will question Mr. Morrell and FBI Deputy Director Sean Joyce about Mr. Petraeus’ affair during meetings Wednesday, a day before the closed-door hearing at which Mr. Petraeus originally was scheduled to appear.

Congressional leaders indicated that they still might call on Mr. Petraeus to testify eventually.

“I would not rule out Gen. Petraeus being called to testify. That still could happen at some point in time,” Sen. Saxby Chambliss, Georgia Republican and vice chairman of the Senate intelligence committee, said on ABC’s “This Week.”

“I don’t see how in the world you can find out what happened in Benghazi before, during and after the attack if Gen. Petraeus doesn’t testify,” Sen. Lindsey Graham, South Carolina Republican and a member of the Senate Armed Services Committee, said on CBS’ “Face the Nation.”

One former senior congressional staffer, who asked for anonymity because of the sensitivity of current employers, told The Washington Times that Mr. Petraeus would be “duty-bound” to testify, even as a private citizen.

“He is still subject to the Uniform Code of Military Justice. He could be asked to testify as a former senior official, and if he refuses — which I don’t think he would — he could be subpoenaed,” said the staffer, who is the director of a House subcommittee.

Mr. Chambliss said that, in the meantime, it is “fine” for Mr. Morrell to testify in Mr. Petraeus’ place at Thursday’s classified hearing, along with Director of National Intelligence James Clapper and Matthew Olson, the head of the National Counterterrorism Center.

Mr. Morrell “certainly was there when all the decisions were made relative to Benghazi,” the senator said.

Mrs. Feinstein also ruled out any connection between Mr. Petraeus’ resignation and its postelection disclosure, and political fallout from the Benghazi incident. For several days after the attack, administration officials said it emerged from spontaneous protests, not terrorists.

There was “absolutely not” any connection to Benghazi, Mrs. Feinstein said. “And, I think if you really think this thing out, you will — everybody will come to that same conclusion.”

But Rep. Peter T. King, New York Republican and chairman of the House Homeland Security Committee, told CNN’s “State of the Union” that the details leaked to the media so far do not makes sense to him.

“It seems this [investigation] has been going on for several months, and yet now it appears that they’re saying the FBI did not realize until Election Day that Gen. Petraeus was involved. It just doesn’t add up,” said Mr. King, who also is a member of the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence. “I have real questions about this. I think the timeline has to be looked at.”

Okay…well, I guess they’ll just have to rely on Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s testimony.

Oh, wait:

…Clinton is reportedly scheduled to travel to Singapore, Australia, Thailand, Burma and Cambodia while the hearing will take place.

The Senate Intelligence Committee also plans to hold a closed-door hearing the same day, according to spokeswoman Victoria Nuland.

At a House hearing before the Nov. 6 elections, Republicans said President Barack Obama’s administration failed to provide adequate diplomatic security before the Benghazi attack and sought to play down the role of terrorists afterward. Democrats defended the administration’s performance and said Republicans were seeking to exploit the attack for political gain.

Clinton, meanwhile, vowed to keep good on her promise to increase security at U.S. diplomatic outposts.

“We now have a formal Accountability Review Board investigating the terrorist attack that killed Chris, and we will certainly apply its recommendations and lessons learned to improving security everywhere,” Clinton said during a tribute to Stevens at the Carnegie Institution for Science in Washington.

The issue is that the chairman of the Accountability Review Board, U.S. diplomat Thomas Pickering, has come under suspicion for being sympathetic to Islamist causes.

Meanwhile, author Ed Klein believes the Clintons are rallying their lawyers in the event the Secretary of State is subpoenaed. Some believe Clinton when she claimed that she did order additional security for the Benghazi compound and that the request had “not been carried out.”

With talk of Hillary Clinton stepping down from her post, it is possible that she may be more outspoken about the administration’s handling of the deadly terror attack come 2013.

And, this just broke wide open yesterday:

Paula Broadwell, the biographer revealed as the woman having a secret affair with the now-former CIA director, gave a talk at the University of Denver on Oct. 26 in which she appeared to reveal sensitive, maybe even classified, information about the Sept. 11 attack on the U.S. consulate in Benghazi.

The most interesting revelation is her claim that the CIA was holding several Libyan militia members prisoner, which may have prompted the attack. (Though she also sought to explain the Obama administration’s initial view that the attack was linked to the YouTube video Innocence of Muslims, an anti-Islam polemic that sparked riots across the Muslim world.)

She also said flatly that forces at the CIA annex had requested backup from a special Delta Force group she called the CINC’s in extremis force. It was not clear whether she was basing her comments on an Oct. 26 Fox News report by Jennifer Griffin, or whether her information came from elsewhere. (Griffin refers to it as “Commanders [sic] in Extremis Force,” but does not mention Delta Force or any Libyan prisoners.)

A CIA spokeswoman disputed the Fox News account at the time, saying, “no one at any level in the CIA told anybody not to help those in need; claims to the contrary are simply inaccurate.” The agency later released a timeline of that evening’s events that cast doubt on Griffin’s story.

In any case, Broadwell’s remarks, which were first reported by Arutz Sheva, are obviously very interesting in light of this week’s big news, as well as the Wall Street Journal’s revelation that the FBI found that Broadwell was in possession of classified documents (though she was never charged with any crime).

Her comments came in response to a questioner who asked her to comment on Petraeus’s handling of the events in Libya.

With this new information leaked by Miss Broadwell, it’s imperative that someone in the Administration needs to speak to the Senate Committee concerning that horrible evening in Benghazi.

I have an idea: Why don’t they ask the president to stop by before he heads out for his upcoming trip to Asia , scheduled for November 17th?

And, if that doesn’t work with his schedule (he likes to sleep in, you know), he could speak directly to the American people, who deserve to know the truth.

Of course, that is about as likely to happen as Obama making a guest appearance at a Gaither Concert.

Until He comes,

KJ

The New Pravda

On By kingsjesterIn Politics7 Comments

I remember growing up in the 1960s, during the Cold War. Every news story that came out of Russia, through their state-controlled News Service, Pravda, was a lie. Lie after lie, told in such a brazen fashion, that if you did not have access to other news sources, you would have sworn it was the truth.

Every lie that was told, was told with the express purpose of masking the inner corruption of the Politboro, or Government, of the Soviet Union, which in turn was designed to reinforce the pablum that they fed their working-class citizens, or the Proletariat.

Since the ascent to the presidency of William Jefferson Blythe Clinton, thanks to the New Media, it has become more and more apparent that the United States of America has a Pravda of its own: The Main Stream Media.

Self-identified “Broadcast and Print Journalists” foresook the ideology of objectivity for subjectivity a long time ago. The main reason Americans began to notice was the advent of cable and satellite television, and, later, the World Wide Web.

In the past, the MSM would only interject themselves overtly, every now and then, as in the case of Dan Rather’s blatant falsification of George W. Bush’s National Guard Service Records.

Heck, ol’ Dan was a novice compared to this generation of journalists...propagandists.

From the very beginnings of Barack Hussein Obama’s collegiate career, on through his entry into Illinois state Politics, and on up to his re-election as President of the United States, these journalists have turned a blind eye to every shady deal the Manchurian President was ever involved in.

The questions remain, though.

How did Obama come up with the money to attend Columbia, Occidental, and fergoshsake’s Hahvahd? Why did he make an undocumented trip to Pock-ee-stahn during these years? How did a mediocre student at best become the Editor of the Harvard Law Review, without writing one paper?

Then there’s his Illinois Senate career. Why did all of his Democrat opponents have to drop out of the race? Why did he vote present so many times? Who was behind his push to prominence? What was the full extent of his relationship to “Bomber” Bill Ayers, ‘just a guy from the neighborhood”, who wrote “Dreams of My Father” for him?

When he ran for the US Senate, why did George Soros provide his finances? How did the “personal scandals” of his opponents Blair Hull and Jack Ryan get leaked to the MSM, and what did David Axlerod have to do with it? Why did Obama miss 24% of 1,300 roll call votes?

After 1 1/2 years in the Senate, Obama declared his candidacy for the Presidency of the United States. Who financed him before and after he received the nomination? What did ACORN/SEIU have to do with it? Who and where did all those unaccounted for small foreign donations come from?

When he was inaugurated, why did he screw up the Oath of Office to the extent that he had to re-take it that evening? Why was his first major speech in a foreign venue an address to the Muslim World? Why is it like pulling teeth to get him to refer to Muslim Terrorists as Muslim Terrorists?

Fast forward to BenghaziGate…Why did he place an openly gay Ambassador in a Muslim country , where they behead people for that? What was Amb. Steven’s doing in Benghazi that day? Why didn’t Obama save those 4 Americans? Why is he continuing to lie about the cause of the attacks of 9/11/12, still insisting that an un-watched video caused the attacks?

Why is the MSM not investigating BenghaziGate? For that matter why did we just find out about this?

Two Iranian Su-25 fighter jets fired on an unarmed U.S. Air Force Predator drone in the Persian Gulf on November 1, the Pentagon disclosed on Thursday.

The incident, reported first by CNN, raised fresh concerns within the Obama administration about Iranian military aggression in crucial Gulf oil shipping lanes.

The drone was on routine maritime surveillance in international airspace east of Kuwait, 16 miles off the coast of Iran, U.S. officials said. The Predator was not hit.

“Our aircraft was never in Iranian airspace. It was always flying in international air space. The recognized limit is 12 nautical miles off the coast and we never entered the 12 nautical mile limit,” Pentagon Press Secretary George Little said in responding to questions from reporters after CNN reported the incident.

Little said the United States believed this was the first time an unmanned aircraft was shot at by the Iranians in international waters over the Gulf. In December of 2011, a U.S. surveillance drone crashed in eastern Iran. Iranians claimed to have shot it down, and created a toy model of the drone to celebrate its capture.

Little stopped short of calling the incident an act of war although the Pentagon was concerned.

Gosh. Do you think that the MSM held onto the story until after the election?

Is Michelle Obama proud of her country…again?

Oh, about that re-election, it now being reported in several states, that more people voted than were on the Voters’ Registration Rolls.

Don’t hold your breath waiting on an in-depth investigation of this.

The MSM have an Inauguration to cover.

Until He comes,

KJ

BenghaziGate: Was it Hillary’s Fault?

On By kingsjesterIn Politics5 Comments

In the latest chapter of the rapidly developing real story of the mass murder at the US Consulate in Benghazi, Libya on 9/11/12, it appears the Former First Lady may have refused to send military backup that fateful night.

Eli Lake reports for The Daily Beast:

On the night of the 9/11 anniversary assault at the U.S. diplomatic mission in Benghazi, the Americans defending the compound and a nearby CIA annex were severely outmanned. Nonetheless, the State Department never requested military backup that evening, two senior U.S. officials familiar with the details of military planning tell The Daily Beast.

In its seventh week, discussion about what happened in Benghazi has begun to focus on why military teams in the region did not respond to the assault on the U.S. mission and the nearby CIA annex. The only security backup that did arrive that evening were former special-operations soldiers under the command of the CIA—one from the nearby annex and another Quick Reaction Force from Tripoli. On Friday, Fox News reported that requests from CIA officers for air support on the evening of the attacks were rejected. (The Daily Beast was not able to confirm that those requests were made, though no U.S. official contacted for this story directly refuted the claim either.)

It’s unlikely any outside military team could have arrived in Benghazi quickly enough to save Ambassador Chris Stevens or his colleague Sean Smith, both of whom died from smoke inhalation after a band of more than 100 men overran the U.S. mission at around 9:30 p.m. that evening and set the buildings inside ablaze.

But military backup may have made a difference at around five the following morning, when a second wave of attackers assaulted the CIA annex where embassy personnel had taken refuge. It was during this second wave of attacks that two ex-SEALs working for the CIA’s security teams—Glenn Doherty and Tyrone Woods—were killed in a mortar strike.

Normally it would be the job of the U.S. ambassador on location to request a military response. But Stevens likely died in the first two hours of the attack. The responsibility for requesting military backup would then have fallen to the deputy chief of mission at Benghazi or officials at the State Department in Washington.

“The State Department is responsible for assessing security at its diplomatic installations and for requesting support from other government agencies if they need it,” a senior U.S. Defense official said. “There was no request from the Department of State to intervene militarily on the night of the attack.”

The president, however, would have the final say as to whether or not to send in the military. By 11 p.m. Benghazi time, 90 minutes after the assault began on the U.S. mission, Obama met with the National Security Council to discuss the attack. NSC spokesman Tommy Vietor said the president “ordered Secretary Panetta and Chairman Dempsey to begin moving assets into the region to prepare for a range of contingencies” at that meeting.

Last summer, the second “issue” of  reutersmagazine.com debuted at the Aspen Ideas Festival. This edition featured an article titled “Hillary vs. the World”.

While actually a Liberal Fluff Piece, it does offers some insight into the way the Liberals and the Former First Lady view her job as the US Secretary of State, a job she has proven to be woefully unqualified for:

…Three and a half years later, there have been remarkably few accounts of feuding between Obama’s White House and Clinton’s State Department—and virtually none between the president himself and his celebrity diplomat. Even so, no one even attempts to claim that Clinton and Obama have forged anything other than a solid professional relationship. If there’s an inner circle of Obama decision-making, Clinton is not in it. And the optimistically ambitious foreign policy agenda of early 2009 has inevitably collided with reality; long since jettisoned are many of the early ideas about reshaping the world for the Obama era—from talking directly to Iran’s ayatollahs to forging a durable Mideast peace built on an American-led push to end Israeli settlements in the West Bank. On the campaign trail, Obama has transformed himself instead into an unlikely tough guy, emphasizing his decision to launch the risky special ops raid that killed Osama bin Laden (which Clinton supported), as well as his moves to draw down the American presence in Iraq and Afghanistan. (Clinton and then-Defense Secretary Bob Gates argued in favor of Obama’s 2009 troop surge.)

For her part, Clinton tends to tout a list of accomplishments that are somewhat short of transformative, if still substantial—from her leadership in pushing a strategic “pivot” to Asia, announced last fall in an article for Foreign Policy, to the extensive personal diplomacy she poured into quickly mobilizing the NATO coalition that launched air strikes to topple Libyan leader Muammar al-Qaddafi. More broadly, if less tangibly, she has put new emphasis at a time of global financial crisis on the role of what she calls “economic statecraft,” including the appointment of the State Department’s first chief economist. She has launched a major reboot of American development efforts modeled on the Pentagon’s quadrennial strategic reviews and has called for an “Internet freedom agenda” that would mobilize new technology on behalf of democracy activists and dissidents the world over, an agenda that has seemed both problematic—bad guys have these tools too—and prescient in anticipating the technology-fueled protests that swept the Middle East during last year’s Arab Spring.

Then there’s managing her in-box, where never a day goes by without some new global headache being added to the mix, a headache that will inevitably require a Clinton phone call, or a meeting, or a flight halfway around the world after having just gotten off a plane. Asked how she approaches the job, Clinton often replies by saying she has to do it all. She has to watch, as she puts it, “the trend lines and the headlines.”

Hillary, along with her boss, President Barack Hussein Obama had a lot to lose, if the Islamic Terrorist attack on the Consulate in Benghazi was revealed to be what it actually was, to the world, in real time. That’s why they came up with the cock and bull story about the “offensive Youtube Video”.

The Benghazi mass murder at our Consulate by those Muslim Terrorists would blow “Smart Power!” all to Hades and back, again. And, the CIC and the SOS simply could not allow that to happen.

Unfortunately for them, their lies are rapidly being replaced by the truth.

Just in time for Election Day.

BenghaziGate: A Matter of Transparency

On By kingsjesterIn Politics6 Comments

On September 11, 2012, 4 brave Americans, including our Ambassador, were murdered on the grounds of the Consulate in Benghazi, Libya. As I wrote the other day, answers are still being sought , and America’s President “ain’t saying a mumblin’ word.”

Perhaps, that is because his present actions are in direct opposition to what he promised upon taking office.

From whitehouse.gov, “Memorandum for the Heads of Executive Departments and Agencies, SUBJECT: Transparency and Open Government”

My Administration is committed to creating an unprecedented level of openness in Government. We will work together to ensure the public trust and establish a system of transparency, public participation, and collaboration. Openness will strengthen our democracy and promote efficiency and effectiveness in Government.

Government should be transparent. Transparency promotes accountability and provides information for citizens about what their Government is doing. Information maintained by the Federal Government is a national asset. My Administration will take appropriate action, consistent with law and policy, to disclose information rapidly in forms that the public can readily find and use. Executive departments and agencies should harness new technologies to put information about their operations and decisions online and readily available to the public. Executive departments and agencies should also solicit public feedback to identify information of greatest use to the public…

As Americans have figured out by now, all of Obama’s promises come with expiration dates.

The Weekly Standard reports:

Seven weeks later, the White House still hasn’t explained what President Obama did and didn’t do during the seven hours of the attack on Benghazi on September 11. And there’s been no response from the White House to questions asked by senators or THE WEEKLY STANDARD or David Ignatius in the Washington Post.

We have, to be sure, heard from some government officials. But the information they’ve provided raises still more questions.

CIA director David Petraeus authorized a statement pointedly saying that “No one at any level in the CIA told anybody not to help those in need; claims to the contrary are simply inaccurate”—which strongly suggests that Petraeus believes or knows that officials in other parts of the government may have told subordinates “not to help those in need.”

Those could have been officials in the Defense Department. Defense Secretary Leon Panetta seemed to suggest that was the case: “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, and as a result of not having that kind of information, the commander who was on the ground in that area, Gen. Ham, Gen. Dempsey and I felt very strongly that we could not put forces at risk in that situation.”

It’s not just Obama and the Administration who are stone-walling. Heck, he’s even got Facebook stone-walling for him, as Breitbart.com reports:

Over the weekend, Facebook took down a message by the Special Operations Speaks PAC (SOS) which highlighted the fact that Obama denied backup to the forces being overrun in Benghazi.

The message was contained in a meme which demonstrated how Obama had relied on the SEALS when he was ready to let them get Osama bin Laden, and how he had turned around and denied them when they called for backup on Sept 11.

I spoke with Larry Ward, president of Political Media, Inc — the media company that handles SOS postings and media production. Ward was the one who personally put the Navy SEAL meme up, and the one who received the warning from Facebook and an eventual 24 hour suspension from Facebook because Ward put the meme back up after Facebook told him to take it down.

Here’s what Ward told me:

We created and posted this meme on Saturday after news broke that Obama had known and denied SEALS the backup they requested.

Once the meme was up it garnered 30,000 shares, approx. 24,000 likes, and was read by hundreds of thousands of people — all within 24 hrs. On Sunday, I went into the SOS Facebook page to post something else and found a warning from Facebook that we had violated Facebook’s Statement of Rights and Responsibilities with our meme. So I copied the warning, put it on the meme as as caption, and re-posted the meme to the Facebook page.

Along with the re-posted meme, Ward put a link to the Facebook “feedback comment” inbox so visitors to the SOS page could send a message to Facebook if they were as outraged over the meme being jerked down as he was.

Ward said Facebook pulled the re-posted meme down within 7 or 8 hours and suspended the SOS account for 24 hours.

In other words, Facebook put the Navy SEALS in timeout in order to shield Obama.

How low can you go?

Evidently, lower than the belly of a snake.

In the newest revelation in this cover-up, Fox News reports

The U.S. Mission in Benghazi convened an “emergency meeting” less than a month before the assault that killed Ambassador Chris Stevens and three other Americans, because Al Qaeda had training camps in Benghazi and the consulate could not defend against a “coordinated attack,” according to a classified cable reviewed by Fox News.

Summarizing an Aug. 15 emergency meeting convened by the U.S. Mission in Benghazi, the Aug. 16 cable marked “SECRET” said that the State Department’s senior security officer, also known as the RSO, did not believe the consulate could be protected.

“RSO (Regional Security Officer) expressed concerns with the ability to defend Post in the event of a coordinated attack due to limited manpower, security measures, weapons capabilities, host nation support, and the overall size of the compound,” the cable said.

According to a review of the cable addressed to the Office of the Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, the Emergency Action Committee was also briefed “on the location of approximately ten Islamist militias and AQ training camps within Benghazi … these groups ran the spectrum from Islamist militias, such as the QRF Brigade and Ansar al-Sharia, to ‘Takfirist thugs.’” Each U.S. mission has a so-called Emergency Action Committee that is responsible for security measures and emergency planning.

The details in the cable seemed to foreshadow the deadly Sept. 11 attack on the U.S. compound, which was a coordinated, commando-style assault using direct and indirect fire. Al Qaeda in North Africa and Ansar al-Sharia, both mentioned in the cable, have since been implicated in the consulate attack.

This is not going away anytime soon.The American public wants some answers.

Ambassador Chris Stevens, Tyrone Woods, Glen Doherty, and Sean Smith remain unavailable for comment.

The Democrats: Using Hurricane Sandy as a Photo Op?

On By kingsjesterIn Politics3 Comments

Yesterday, as local authorities in the Northeast performed the arduous and perilous task of digging their constituents out, in the aftermath of Hurricane Sunday, the Democratic Party, their Presidential Candidate, Barack Hussein Obama, and their minion, Martin Bashir, at MSNBC, were busy trying to score political points.

Bashir had some guests on with him on his program on MSNBC, offering their analysis of Republican Presidential Candidate Mitt Romney’s charitable work with the American Red Cross, as part of the Hurricane Sandy Relief Effort.

Noel Sheppard describes the scene, in a post on newsbusters.org: 

…Imagine that. A presidential candidate who gives millions of dollars a year to charity does a storm relief event in Ohio, and an MSNBC anchor is disgusted by it because the Red Cross would prefer people donating cash.

Yet according to the Washington Post:

The stop was billed as a “storm relief” event, and attendees were asked to bring non-perishable foods and other items for those affected by the storm. Long white tables to one side of the cavernous James S. Trent Arena were piled high with flashlights, batteries, diapers, toothbrushes, mini-deodorants, fleece blankets, cereal, toilet paper and canned goods.

Two large TV screens at the front of the venue bore the logo of the American Red Cross and the message: “Sandy: Support the Relief Effort. Text ’REDCROSS’ to 90999 to make a $10 donation.”

So besides the food and supplies that Ohioans generously donated, two large television screens asked participants to send money to the Red Cross.

But this didn’t make Bashir happy. Ditto his Obama-supporting guests.

“I think that this is just another moment where you see the clear striking difference between a president who has a heart for the American people and someone who simply wants to be president of the United States,” said Mayor Reed.

“Indeed,” replied Bashir who then asked for Peterson’s input.

“I would agree,” echoed Peterson. “It’s compassion that shows through in times like these. It’s humanity that shows through in times like these, and it just seems clear that the President, in addition to stepping up and doing what he does as Commander-in-Chief, demonstrates compassion in these remarks and in his approach to this kind of serious disaster.”

“All we’ve seen from Romney and from his surrogates is all kinds of politicizing and misdirection,” Peterson continued, “and I think the American people in this sort of disastrous moment can really see in bold relief the differences between President Obama and former Governor Romney.”

So having a storm relief event with tables “piled high with flashlights, batteries, diapers, toothbrushes, mini-deodorants, fleece blankets, cereal, toilet paper and canned goods” along with two large television screens calling for donations to the Red Cross demonstrates a lack of compassion on MSNBC.

Yet the network didn’t end there.

About a half hour later, Bashir brought GQ’s Ana Marie Cox on to trash Romney’s event.

“I found that sort of fake, relief rally, whatever it is, to be pretty offensive, and also wrong-headed,” said Cox. She actually called Romney “craven” for doing it.

I’m not kidding.

This was followed by MSNBC contributor Karen Finney saying, “As a former governor, I would think that he would know that what the Red Cross needs in times like this is money and blood.”

Yes, that’s why there were two large television screens asking for people to donate to the Red Cross.

And, what was the Democratic Candidate doing yesterday? Well, according to the Washington Times:

President Obama may have suspended his campaign rallies due to Hurricane Sandy, but he managed to squeeze in his campaign slogan — intentionally or not — during a briefing Tuesday with federal emergency officials.

“The president made clear that he expects his team to remain focused as the immediate impacts of Hurricane Sandy continue and lean forward in their response,” the White House said in a statement about Mr. Obama’s video-teleconference that he conducted from the White House Situation Room. “Forward” is the slogan of his re-election campaign.

Mr. Obama canceled all campaign events on Monday, Tuesday and Wednesday as the storm lashed the East Coast, causing billions of dollars worth of destruction, resulting in several deaths and interrupting power for millions of residents.

He was joined on the video conference by Vice President Joseph R. Biden, Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano, FEMA Administrator Craig Fugate, Defense Secretary Leon E. Panetta and other federal officials.

The White House said Mr. Obama “expressed his concern for those impacted by the storm, as well as the heroic first responders who are selflessly putting themselves in harm’s way to protect members of their communities. He also noted his sadness over the loss of life associated with the storm so far.”

There’s more…from breitbart.com:

Today [Tuesday], during a non-campaign campaign stop at the Red Cross, President Obama told the nation something his administration obviously didn’t believe during the seven-hour attack on our consulate in Benghazi (and a nearby annex) on the night of September 11, 2012: That when an “American is in need… we leave nobody behind”:

This is a tough time for a lot of people; millions of folks all across the Eastern Seaboard, but America’s tougher. And we’re tougher because we pull together, we leave nobody behind, we make sure we respond as a nation and remind ourselves that whenever an American is in need, all of stand together to make sure we’re providing the help that’s necessary.

So, while Romney was pitching in and helping out with The Red Cross’s Relief Efforts, Obama was having a Photo Op.

Par for the course.

As I tweeted yesterday,

“We leave nobody behind.” – Obama 10/30/12 The 4 brave Americans murdered by Muslim Terrorists in Benghazi remain unavailable for comment.

Obama Out West Avoiding 2 Storms: Frankenstorm and Benghazigate

On By kingsjesterIn Politics1 Comment

Even as “Frankenstorm” menacingly approaches the Northeastern Region of our country, the 44th President of these United States, Barack Hussein Obama, (mm mmm mmmm) is fearlessly appearing at Campaign Stops out West, praying to whomever it is that he prays to, that the firestorm caused by political expediency, now known as Benghazigate, will continue to be squelched by his willing dupes in the Main Stream Media.

Foxnews.com summarizes for us:

President Obama declined to answer directly whether a CIA annex was denied urgent requests for military assistance during the deadly attacks last month on U.S. outposts in Libya.

The president did not give a yes-or-no answer Friday when asked pointedly whether the Americans under attack in Benghazi, Libya, were denied requests for help during the attack.

Fox News has also learned that a request from the CIA annex for backup was later denied.

“The election has nothing to do with the four brave Americans getting killed and us wanting to find out exactly what happened,” the president said in TV interview with an NBC affiliate in Colorado.

When asked again, Obama said, “The minute I found out what was going on, I gave three very clear directives — Number 1, make sure that we are securing our personnel and doing whatever we need to.”

The first attack occurred at the American consulate in Benghazi, killing U.S. Ambassador Christopher Stevens and U.S. diplomat Sean Smith.

Former Navy SEAL Tyrone Woods was part of a small team that was at the CIA annex about a mile from the consulate when it came under attack. Upon hearing shots fired, team members asked higher-ups at the annex if they could go the consulate. However, they were told to “stand down,” according to sources familiar with the exchange.

Woods and at least two others ignored those orders and went to the consulate, evacuating survivors and Smith, who had been killed in the initial attack.

They could not find the ambassador and returned to the CIA annex at about midnight. At that point, they called again for military support and help because they were taking fire at the CIA safe house, or annex. The request was denied. Woods and fellow former Navy SEAL Glen Doherty were killed at the annex by a mortar shell at 4 a.m.

The CIA and Defense Department have denied claims about requests for support being rejected.

“The agency reacted quickly to aid our colleagues during that terrible evening in Benghazi,” said CIA spokeswoman Jennifer Youngblood. “Moreover, no one at any level in the CIA told anybody not to help those in need. Claims to the contrary are simply inaccurate.”

Defense Secretary Leon Panetta said there was not a clear enough picture of what was occurring on the ground in Benghazi to send help.

“There’s a lot of Monday morning quarterbacking going on here,” he said Thursday. “But the basic principle here … is that you don’t deploy forces into harm’s way without knowing what’s going on.”

Obama also said in the TV interview, as he said previously said, the administration is going to “investigate what happened to make sure it never happens again” and find out who was involved in the attack so they can be brought to justice.

“I guarantee you that everybody in the State Department, our military, CIA, you name it, have a No.1 priority making sure that people are safe. These are our folks. And we’re going to find out exactly what happened but what we’re also going to do is make sure that we are identify those who carried out these terrible attacks,” the president said.

Now, it’s coming to light that there may be a very good reason why Obama will not directly answer questions concerning exactly who was the one ignoring those brave Americans’ requests for help.

According to Breitbart.com:

Lt. Col. Tony Schafer told Fox News that sources were telling him that the President was watching the attack on the U.S. consulate in Benghazi, Libya in real-time. Schafer told Fox that “only the President” could have ordered backup for the Americans who were under siege by terrorists so the President was most certainly informed of the situation as it was unfolding. “I hate to say this,” Schafer said, “according to my sources, yes, [the President] was one of those in the White House situation room in real-time watching this. And the question becomes, ‘What did the President do or not do in the moments he saw this unveiling?’ He — only he — could issue a directive to Secretary of Defense Panetta to do something.”

And, in a related story from abcnews.go.com:

In an unusual move, the Navy has replaced an admiral commanding an aircraft carrier strike group while it is deployed to the Middle East. The replacement was prompted by an Inspector General’s investigation of allegations of inappropriate leadership judgment.

Rear Adm. Charles M. Gaouette, the commander of the USS John C. Stennis strike group, is being returned to the United States for temporary reassignment.

In a statement the Navy said it had approved a request made by Vice Adm. John W. Miller, the Commander of U.S. Naval Forces Central Command, to temporarily reassign Gaouette “pending the results of an investigation by the Navy Inspector General.”

The statement said Gaoutte would return to the carrier’s home port of Bremerton, Washington.

A Navy official familiar with the circumstances of the investigation said it involved allegations of “inappropriate leadership judgment” and stressed it was not related to personal conduct.

Uh huh.

Charles Woods, father of Tyrone Woods, one of those brave Americans killed on 9/11/12, said, during an interview on Fox News:

This news that he disobeyed his orders does not surprise me. My son was an American hero, and he had the moral strength to do what was right … even if it would have professionally cost him his job, even if it would have cost him his life.

…The reason I’m speaking out right now is that after the facts came out that the White House […] watched my son and denied his pleas for help, my son violated his orders to protect the lives of at least 30 people. He risked his life to be a hero; I wish the leadership in the White House had the same level of moral courage that my son displayed.

Indeed, Mr. Woods. Indeed.

Addendum:  Since I wrote this post, Obama has decided to cancel his Campaign Stop out West today and is flying back to DC for a Photo Op…err…to “monitor” the storm.