From the Washingtonpost.com:
“Bottom line, I’m more disturbed now than I was before,” said Sen. Lindsey O. Graham (S.C.).
Rice and Acting CIA Director Michael Morell met privately with Graham and Sens. John McCain (Ariz.) and Kelly Ayotte (N.H.), three members of the Senate Armed Services Committee who have been leading the GOP charge against the administration since the attack that led to the deaths of four Americans, including Ambassador J. Christopher Stevens.
Ayotte said she left the meeting with Rice “more troubled, not less.”
McCain told reporters that he and his colleagues remain “significantly troubled by many of the answers that we got and some that we didn’t get concerning evidence that was overwhelming leading up to the attack on our consulate that we tried to get.”
And late Tuesday, the three senators issued a statement that said: “We are disturbed by the Administration’s continued inability to answer even the most basic questions about the Benghazi attack and the Administration’s response. Beyond Ambassador Rice’s misstatements, we continue to have questions about what happened in Benghazi before, during, and after the attack on our consulate — as well as the President’s statements regarding the attack.”
Do McCain, Graham and Ayotte have something wrong with them? Why the OCD over something that obviously isn’t going to change. Is this all a matter of Gotcha to the Prez or is it simply their failure to comprehend?
McCain and Graham have both really turned out to be nasty, angry old men. I don’t understand now. Is this still backlash from McCain losing? He shouldn’t have selected ‘chix’ as a running mate. I would take 10 Paul Ryans to one Palin. Ryan, regardless of how politically unpalatable I find him, is not ignorant and hateful.
So will McCain and Graham just continue to be nasty of men? Will someone pick them out of their senate seats this go-round and free up their constituents for folks with better dispositions and less OCD?
Why aren’t they driving their wrath at President Obama? Why pick on Susan Rice who was simply filling in and relying on the information she was given in her briefing? Could it be…????? Nah. Not even going to allow myself to think that. Too obvious.
Lastly, what’s it it for the Prez to try to slide a terrorist attack under the rug? That has never made sense and the more I hear it, the dumber it sounds.
I agree. They need to drop her because all she did was read talking point given to her. They SHOULD go after the President since that’s what he asked them to do. Who was responsible for the Benghazi fiasco?
Are all terrorist attacks on a Democratic president’s watch considered a fiasco?
How about 2 entire cities under attack under a Republic reign? You know, I never heard a anyone who wasn ‘t a nut case blame George Bush for 9/11.
I didn’t blame Obama for the attack. I blame him for the lack of security and the idiotic attempted coverup even after the facts were known. Mainly for the coverup.
I understand that the ambassador may have been doing something “sneaky” in the service of our country. But the contradictory stories coming from the admin are what’s driving this. Their stories don’t add up. And then we find out that there was real time info….after being told that there was no info? With fast reaction troops only a few hours away, and combat aircraft only one hour away?
As they say..its not the “crime.” It’s the cover-up.
What real time info? What does that mean?
Obama should have been out there dragging in the sandbags and concertina wire to secure the parameter. Do you understand how absurd that sounds? That’s like saying Bush should have had better security on the pentagon and WTC.
The CIA was responsible for the security. Do you think maybe it was that way for a reason?
Blame Obama. Who the hell cares at this point. Do you seriously envision the POTUS micromanaging things that much?
I see this as a distraction away from what Republcans plan to do to the economy. Nothing else makes sense.
Well, whoever was behind the attack sure has gotten their 15 minutes of fame out of it – was that not what they wanted – publicity and to watch the Americans trample over themselves.
And, with all the grand standing of McCain and Graham – we still do not know who was behind this attack – maybe, that is what the CIA was doing there – and with all their pontificating, they are exposing our operation more and more (look at the Petraeus testimony)
http://www.cnn.com/2012/11/27/opinion/bergen-gop-benghazi/?hpt=po_c2
I can’t believe I’m saying this but I agree 100% with Jay Carney…. yuck, just threw up in my mouth.
STFU about Benghazi when it comes to Susan Rice! Look at her record and her career pre-Benghazi, several Democrats have come out and said that she isn’t qualified to be SOS. If your going to go after her for something why not just bring up what negative things Democrats have said about her and why THEY don’t even thing she is fit for the job.
@Moon-howler
Panetta stated that they did not have the intel to do a rescue. Then it was revealed that the WH was watching the whole thing on video by drone. Therefore, they had the intel. Help was requested and they did not get it.
As for a distraction for what the Republicans plan to do to the economy? Really? They have the House and the Democrats have the Presidency and the no-show Senate, and you’re looking at the Republicans? At least the House is writing plans…where’s the Senate plan or Obama’s plan? They keep talking but haven’t put anything in writing…..tick tock…that fiscal cliff that they invented is getting closer.
@Pat.Herve
You’re right. But after the attack….the bad guys know because no attempt was made to secure the site. Even CNN reporters days later were able to just walk in and pick up classified documents. So, there is not much damage that the Senators can do. Of course, the coverups always attract more attention. Maybe the admin shouldn’t have done that. Maybe they should have come clean to the House and Senate Intel oversight committees.
This whole thing is beginning to sound like a Republican whine-fest. It’s over. Just like the election. No one is able to anticipate every attack that terrorists or mobs will make – that’s why it’s called terrorism.
I want all the whiners to come up with detailed plans for all our embassies and outposts and show how they’re going to fund the extra details. Immediately. They’re experts, apparently, on what happened in this instance. Pony up the info on future plans. It should be easy for all the armchair experts. Otherwise, they’re beginning to sound like a bunch of cranky old men.
PPPPSSSST, Censored…..STOP SPENDING. Bwwwaaaaaaaaahahahahahahhaa. Those back ups cost $$$$$.
Plan to secure embassy
1) When said embassy notifies the State Dept that it believes that it is in danger and will come under attack, reinforce said agency.
2) When said embassy requests military help, send requested help.
3) If Item 1 is fulfilled, Item 2 will probably not be necessary.
Embassy shall mean any entity attached to the diplomatic mission.
I should have called you and asked, Cargo….knowing you were there with your eyes on the prize.
I believe this should bear investigation. And I think it’s fair that Rice may not be confirmed, for falling on the sword here. I don’t approve of our ruling elites using the instrument of government to cover up inconvenient facts, when those facts undercut their simple-minded election year campaigns.
Having said that, I expect the worst from our government and I assume that Ms. Rice will be confirmed regardless of any hearings or additional findings. Because this debate isn’t really substantive. Whether or not this woman is confirmed, each political party will continue to obfuscate inconvenient facts at will. The two parties will collude towards a government that systemically functions to serve the ruling class, and argue over stupid minor points like this after the dust settles. FOX News is woofing and woofing but the woman will be confirmed at the end of the day. Most of the GOP’s daily talking points are sound and fury signifying nothing.
And in a large sense, if the GOP is allowed a suckup hack named Rice to become Secretary of State, it’s only fair that the Democrats should get the same.
She hasn’t been nominated yet. All of that is based on rumor.
I have seen Bill Richardson a lot of TV. They are trotting him out for some reason. He has all sorts of ambassador experience.
Sorry
reinforce said agency. should read reinforce said embassy.
Monday morning quarterbacking.
So tell me, how much work went in to this quarterbacking, putting that security out there, after WTC and the Pentagon got hit? Oh, it wasnt a consulate? Does it matter?
You are obsessing.
And the only systemic solution would be … term limits.
Still beating this dead horse, I see.
Incidentally, I read that the ambassador was there to make an award to a local. There was nothing “sneaky” about this. Risky, yes, but the ambassador was aware if the risks and believed his work was worth it. God bless him and his men.
@Cargosquid
cargo – how many times was additional security denied for all the overseas US embassy’s (and affiliated outposts) during the past 4 years? 12 years? 20 years? And, how much additional funding is required to fulfill those requests?
From what I understand, the request for the security was for the actual Embassy in Tripoli, not for Benghazi – so, does this make the point moot?
The only source I can find that says that reinforcements was denied all tie back to Sean Hannity – can you point me to another source (I do not find Hannity to be trustworthy)?
@Rick Bentley
Completely agree. Personally I don’t think that it matters if Rice is Sec of State. She’s just an employee of the President.
As for more security after WTC and Pentagon? TSA ring any bells? An entire new freaking department? Patriot Act.
@Pat.Herve
I don’t don’t how many times? If it was in a dangerous zone like Libya, it would be inexcusable. Valerie Jarrett has millions of dollars worth of security but the ambassador in Libya didn’t?
I see if I can find other sources. I don’t think that Hannity is the original source.
It’s amazing how many people feel that Rice isn’t qualified to be Sec. of State.
As Moon says, the woman hasn’t even been nominated.
Hannity is despicable. Happened on to him T-giving night. Both “The Five” and even
O’Reilly had pleasant, nice programs suitable for the day. So what does Hannity put on but something called “District of Corruption”, throwing dirt at the President.
Hannity simply has no class, does he?
I find it ironic that the liberals here seem to watch more Hannity and Fox than do the conservatives.
One question, did they ever determine who gave the order to ‘stand down’? That would be of some interest.
What are you talking about, SA?
@Moon-howler
The order to not rescue the people in Benghzi….the refusal to authorize a cross border insertion.
@Cargosquid
I don’t need to watch Hannity to know he has no class.
You are assuming. I rarely watch Faux News. I used to and then I decided my mood was a lot better when I got the lies and BS out of my life. I have often wondered how those people on there can be so deluded or if they would do anything for money. I decided the answer was yes and only watch briefly on weekends to hear bulls and bears give false stock tips. They cant even do that right.
I find it ironic that in someo folks’ minds people can either be liberal or conservative and there is no middle ground.
Oh well…I define myself.
But for Cargo, I am sure I am a liberal. If I wore silks and a pointy hat you would think I was liberal. woe is me.
@Moon-howler
🙂 I didn’t mention your name. I figured the liberals would self-identify.
If one supports the liberal Democrat agenda and votes for the Democrat candidates…..one is a liberal.