Utopia Talk / Politics / White House Was Involved - PROVEN

Hot Rod Revved Up	Tue Apr 29 12:45:10 Benghazi emails suggest White House aide involved in prepping Rice for ‘video’ explanation By Catherine Herridge Published April 29, 2014 FoxNews.com Newly released emails on the Benghazi terror attack suggest a senior White House aide played a central role in preparing former U.N. ambassador Susan Rice for her controversial Sunday show appearances -- where she wrongly blamed protests over an Internet video. More than 100 pages of documents were released to the conservative watchdog group Judicial Watch as part of a Freedom of Information Act lawsuit. Among them was a Sept. 14, 2012, email from Ben Rhodes, an assistant to the president and deputy national security adviser for strategic communications. The Rhodes email, with the subject line: "RE: PREP Call with Susan: Saturday at 4:00 pm ET," was sent to a dozen members of the administration's inner circle, including key members of the White House communications team such as Press Secretary Jay Carney. In the email, Rhodes specifically draws attention to the anti-Islam Internet video, without distinguishing whether the Benghazi attack was different from protests elsewhere. The email lists the following two goals, among others: "To underscore that these protests are rooted in an Internet video, and not a broader failure of policy." "To reinforce the President and Administration's strength and steadiness in dealing with difficult challenges." The email goes on to state that the U.S. government rejected the message of the Internet video. "We find it disgusting and reprehensible. But there is absolutely no justification at all for responding to this movie with violence," the email stated. Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton said the documents read like a PR strategy, not an effort to provide the best available intelligence to the American people. "The goal of the White House was to do one thing primarily, which was to make the president look good. Blame it on the video and not [the] president's policies," he said. The Rhodes email was not part of the 100 pages of emails released by the administration last May -- after Republicans refused to move forward with the confirmation of John Brennan as CIA director until the so-called "talking points" emails were made public. The email is also significant because in congressional testimony in early April, former deputy CIA director Michael Morell told lawmakers it was Rice, in her Sunday show appearances, who linked the video to the Benghazi attack. Morell said the video was not part of the CIA analysis. "My reaction was two-fold," Morell told members of the House Intelligence Committee, regarding her appearances. "One was that what she said about the attacks evolving spontaneously from a protest was exactly what the talking points said, and it was exactly what the intelligence community analysts believed. When she talked about the video, my reaction was, that's not something that the analysts have attributed this attack to." Incidentally, three leading Republicans on Monday night sent letters to the House and Senate foreign affairs committees asking them to compel the administration to explain who briefed Rice in advance of the Sunday talk shows and whether State Department or White House personnel were involved. "How could former Ambassador to the United Nations Susan Rice, during the five Sunday talk shows on September 16, 2012, claim that the attacks on our compounds were caused by a hateful video when Mr. Morell testified that the CIA never mentioned the video as a causal factor," said the letter, from Sens. Lindsey Graham, of South Carolina; Kelly Ayotte, of New Hampshire; and John McCain, of Arizona. The Sept. 14 Rhodes email does not indicate whether there was a "prep call" for Rice, as it suggests. If the call went ahead, it does not indicate who briefed her. Fox News has asked the White House if Rhodes prepped Rice for the Sunday shows, and, if he didn't, who did -- as well as what intelligence Rhodes relied upon. The newly released emails also show that on Sept. 27, 2012 a Fox News report -- titled "US officials knew Libya attack was terrorism within 24 hours, sources confirm" -- was circulated at the most senior levels of the administration. This included going to then-deputy national security adviser Denis McDonough; then-White House counterterrorism adviser John Brennan; Morell; and Rhodes, among others, but the comments were redacted, citing "personal privacy information." Catherine Herridge is an award-winning Chief Intelligence correspondent for FOX News Channel (FNC) based in Washington, D.C. She covers intelligence, the Justice Department and the Department of Homeland Security. Herridge joined FNC in 1996 as a London-based correspondent. http://www...ed-in-prepping-rice-for-video/
Aeros Member	Tue Apr 29 13:01:16 Let it go Hot Rod. Just let it go.
Rugian Member	Tue Apr 29 13:06:49 Oh good lord.
tumbleweed the wanderer	Tue Apr 29 13:08:29 hasn't it been established there was legitimate reason to suspect the video?
Fred Felcher Member	Tue Apr 29 13:10:12 JESUS!
Hot Rod Revved Up	Tue Apr 29 13:15:14 My God Man, the proof is there if front of you. "Among them was a Sept. 14, 2012, email from Ben Rhodes, an assistant to the president and deputy national security adviser for strategic communications." One of Obama's personal advisers was directly involved in prepping Rice for TV shows with was a known lie. You do not go much higher than that. "The email lists the following two goals, among others: "To underscore that these protests are rooted in an Internet video, and not a broader failure of policy." "To reinforce the President and Administration's strength and steadiness in dealing with difficult challenges."" Christ man, you people accused Bush of lying for eight years without a shred of proof and here is *CONCRETE PROOF* that a personal assistant to Obama helped create a lie and you won't even look at it. What kind of people are you liberals? Now you know why I watch FOX News, they are Fair and Balanced, they have much more integrity than you liberals.
Hot Rod Revved Up	Tue Apr 29 13:17:53 tw - hasn't it been established there was legitimate reason to suspect the video? How could there be when everyone of authority in Libya that night told Washington that it was an Attack and not a demonstration.
Hot Stick Member	Tue Apr 29 13:19:26 All Libertarians and Independents should watch Fox News. They are the only news channel to expose the liberal's lies.
Hot Rod Revved Up	Tue Apr 29 13:26:51 hs, the liberals should watch too so they will know what is really happening in the world.
Aeros Member	Tue Apr 29 13:30:00 I would like to take a moment to distract you all from this amazing thread to tell you about my lord and savior, Jesus Christ. Hot Rod, do you know whether or not you will go to heaven when you die?
Hot Rod Revved Up	Tue Apr 29 13:32:10 Don't change the subject. The proof is right there. Do you honestly think FOX made this up?
Aeros Member	Tue Apr 29 13:34:10 "The proof is right there. Do you honestly think FOX made this up?" Of course the proof is right there. All it takes is a little research to know that Jesus was a real person who died for our sins. FOX News does a great service for humanity in bringing it up all the time, though I do have concerns that they don't go far enough in truly spreading the gospel. Tell me Hot Rod, are you ready to be saved?
Nimatzo iChihuaha	Tue Apr 29 13:37:32 Please tell me more of this Jesus character, he sounds like a really swell guy!
Hot Rod Revved Up	Tue Apr 29 13:41:46 Notice I have not claimed that Ben Rhodes must have talked to the President about his email. As far as I know, Obama is still in the dark about what his staff did. But his staff, at the highest levels, did indeed know about the lies that were given to Susan Rice to disseminate to the American public. Rice may not even have known, but a portion of Obama's high level staff knew about the lie. "The Rhodes email, with the subject line: "RE: PREP Call with Susan: Saturday at 4:00 pm ET," was sent to a dozen members of the administration's inner circle, including key members of the White House communications team such as Press Secretary Jay Carney."
Aeros Member	Tue Apr 29 13:42:06 Well I am glad you asked Brother Nim! You see, its all here in this book that I am giving away, free of charge. It has all the answers to any question you might have in life. And reading Hot Rods posting, I can tell he is just full of questions that he needs answers too. Well fear not, for the answer is in the bible. You just need to let Jesus into your heart and everything will become clear! All that fear, hate, and confusion will melt away!
Hot Rod Revved Up	Tue Apr 29 13:46:05 So, I will take your avoidance of the subject that you are now convinced that lies are coming out of The White House at the highest levels. I will assume that you will no longer believe a word the lying sons of bitches force upon you. Is that a correct assumption?
Aeros Member	Tue Apr 29 13:46:31 the correct assumption is that you need Jesus.
Hot Rod Revved Up	Tue Apr 29 23:31:13 Don't you guys want to read how I trashed Aeros and Nimatzo. Plus how the coverup of Benghazi goes all the way to one of Obama's personal advisers?
obaminated Member	Tue Apr 29 23:38:14 The only reason we know any of this is because judicial watch sued the administration. It proves they were all lying to the American people. They did it to protect Obama and possibly Hillary in an election cycle. It may not be criminal but to shrug and say it means nothing is stupid.
Hot Rod Revved Up	Tue Apr 29 23:43:38 It makes you wonder who all was in on it.
Im better then you 2012 UP Football Champ	Wed Apr 30 00:09:47 You do realize most people knew all this when they voted for Obama in 2012 or at least that it wasn't caused by a protest or whatever.
obaminated Member	Wed Apr 30 00:32:56 The point is the administration lied repeatedly and now we have proven it.
Paramount Member	Wed Apr 30 00:44:15 I don't think Obama admin lied. They just presented the facts, the known knowns, that what known at the particular time.
Paramount Member	Wed Apr 30 00:44:46 * that was known
obaminated Member	Wed Apr 30 03:03:50 "ed Apr 30 00:44:15 I don't think Obama admin lied. They just presented the facts, the known knowns, that what known at the particular time." This is because you are fucking retard jr.
mexicantardnado Member	Wed Apr 30 04:58:59 WMD'S!
roland Member	Wed Apr 30 05:39:40 benghaziiiiiiii+!!!!!!!!!!!
Hot Rod Revved Up	Wed Apr 30 07:31:36 You insist Bush lied when there was no proof and you dissed us for defending him. I give you *ABSOLUTE* proof that a lie was manufactured at the highest level of the administration and you deny it. "The email lists the following two goals, among others: "To underscore that these protests are rooted in an Internet video, and not a broader failure of policy." "To reinforce the President and Administration's strength and steadiness in dealing with difficult challenges."" Just once I would like to see you guys man up, but this tell me you never will. All of you, get under the porch with your tail between your legs.
Paramount Member	Wed Apr 30 08:29:37 "You insist Bush lied when there was no proof and you dissed us for defending him." Yes, there was a whole website - a database, full of hundreds of proven lies by Bush and his admin. But despite of all the proof you people were unable or unwilling to see the truth.
Valishin Member	Wed Apr 30 08:45:20 "All Libertarians and Independents should watch Fox News. They are the only news channel to expose the liberal's lies." While there is some truth there, it is worth noting that exposing conservative lies is import as well. And while Fox may be better than some others they aren't entirely forthcoming either. "So, I will take your avoidance of the subject that you are now convinced that lies are coming out of The White House at the highest levels." They always knew that to be the case, they are simply ok with it so long as it forwards an agenda of which they approve. "I don't think Obama admin lied. They just presented the facts, the known knowns, that what known at the particular time." You might be able to say that Obama didn't know, but the timeline of who know what and when discredits your assertion in regards to the administration. The admin was well aware what was going on prior to Rice going on the Sunday talk circuit, but pushed the video story anyway to save face. The real problem isn't so much that deception for the sake of a political agenda happened that's bad don't get me wrong. But, the real problem is that both parties think this is par for the course and only see it as an issue when the other side does it. Although admittedly the dems are considerably more comfortable with this tactic. It's quite simple, in many minds the ends justify the means.
Hot Rod Revved Up	Wed Apr 30 10:34:32 Agreed.
Dakyron Member	Wed Apr 30 10:51:21 Hot Rod is to Benghazi what CNN is to flight MH370.
Hot Rod Revved Up	Wed Apr 30 10:56:46 No, what you liberals won't admit is that Benghazi is a bigger coverup than Watergate. This newly released email of Ben Rhodes proves it, IMHO. That email went to, "a dozen members of the administration's inner circle, including key members of the White House communications team such as Press Secretary Jay Carney." Didn't Carney continue to claim it was the video long after Rice went on TV?
Valishin Member	Wed Apr 30 10:58:57 That may be, but the issue of government's willingness to lie to the people to forward political agenda's is more than worthy of keeping the Benghazi issue in play. On top of that with a likely Clinton presidential bid up coming and this having happened on her watch what she knew and when she knew it is important. I get why the liberals want to pretend it never happened. They are entirely comfortable with this tactic they just aren't comfortable with the public knowing how comfortable they are. Also, because it isn't as recent as last week why people want to just let it go as a lost battle makes sense in our 24hr news cycle but the reality is that getting govenment back to answering to the people is the most critical issue of our day.
MrPresident07 Member	Wed Apr 30 10:59:20 Yes, Benghazi was covered up and lied about. The sad/bad thing is nobody cares because it's been talked about and hashed out so much for the past few years. We're gonna have to let this one go.
Dakyron Member	Wed Apr 30 11:00:20 A 1 day cover-up? What the fuck is the point of that?
MrPresident07 Member	Wed Apr 30 11:02:52 "A 1 day cover-up? What the fuck is the point of that?" Indeed, what was the point of that? Obama wanted to continue the narrative that he was winning against terrorism going into the election. That's the point of it.
MrPresident07 Member	Wed Apr 30 11:04:00 Also, this may have been more about covering the CIA's ass than anyone else's. We'll probably never know what really went down there.
Dakyron Member	Wed Apr 30 11:14:48 "Indeed, what was the point of that? Obama wanted to continue the narrative that he was winning against terrorism going into the election. That's the point of it." Then why not keep it up? Why reverse course after 1 day? "We'll probably never know what really went down there." Facts seem pretty clear to me. Ambassador travels abroad despite clear evidence this is dangerous. Terror groups sees the opportunity and attacks. He is killed. Susan Rice goes on tv and makes a dumb statement about a youtube video. Obama appears on TV the next day to correct her. Hot Rod, Fox News, and retards everywhere foam at the mouth for years following this rather minor incident.
Hot Rod Revved Up	Wed Apr 30 11:17:07 The main reason of the coverup was to get Obama reelected and it worked.
Dakyron Member	Wed Apr 30 11:18:20 Obama was re-elected in the 24 hours following Benghazi? Link?
Valishin Member	Wed Apr 30 11:31:14 "A 1 day cover-up? What the fuck is the point of that?" They didn't think there would be any blowback. They likely assumed that in a few months the details would be corrected and everyone would have forgotten what was said previously. Thus preserving Obama's position in the polls. "Obama was re-elected in the 24 hours following Benghazi?" Wasn't he re-elected while they continued claiming no cover up occurred?
Valishin Member	Wed Apr 30 11:37:24 In a nut shell here is why left is so big on objecting to anyone bringing up Benghazi. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Dx32b5igLwA
obaminated Member	Wed Apr 30 12:08:52 "Then why not keep it up? Why reverse course after 1 day? " You are honestly a fucking moron, Dak. Susan Rice came out a week after the attack and told the media outlets she was on that it was due to a youtube video. Hillary Clinton stood in front of the caskets of the dead people and declared "the us had no involvement in the making of this video" and then (allegedly) told a family member of one of that dead that "we will get the guy who made the video". That Hillary Clinton went that far, yeah that woman is going to be destroyed with that if she tries to run for president. Because it is correct that Benghazi is overlooked, but it is overlooked because it isn't an election issue because no one in congress is involved. But if Hillary runs, this will be a major scandal for her. And she will have to explain why she thought muslims would riot over an obscure youtube video. Furthermore she will have to explain why she as secretary of state believed an obscure video would cause a coordinated attack on september 11th.
MrPresident07 Member	Wed Apr 30 12:51:45 Not only that, but lax security after requests were made in a hot spot during the anniversary of 9/11. "Then why not keep it up? Why reverse course after 1 day?" The way I remembered it, it went longer than a day and Val provides the adequate reason.
Hot Rod Revved Up	Wed Apr 30 13:09:52 OMG, Carney is saying the email had nothing to do with Benghazi, but the broader situation in Egypt and elsewhere. Then why was it classified? How stupid do they think we are.
Hot Rod Revved Up	Wed Apr 30 13:40:35 The Director of Judicial Watch is on with Gretchen right now. The JW suit against the government requested *specifically* documents about Benghazi. They did not sue for documents about the protests in Egypt and elsewhere. Only documents about Benghazi. And this email is one of the documents turned over to them.
MrPresident07 Member	Wed Apr 30 13:49:55 Lol, this could get interesting again. Won't be as big a deal as it should be though.
MrPresident07 Member	Wed Apr 30 13:55:11 http://new...ing-to-do-with-benghazi-video/ Fun stuff between Carney and Karl.
Dakyron Member	Wed Apr 30 13:56:34 Well, Carney is a retard if he thinks he convince people the email is not about Benghazi.
Hot Rod Revved Up	Wed Apr 30 13:57:21 I would love to see Ben Rhodes before Representative Issa's committee under oath.
McJesus Burger Member	Wed Apr 30 18:52:46 Obama should be water boarded until the truth of the scandal comes out
Hot Rod Revved Up	Wed Apr 30 19:20:13 Maybe that is why he made water boarding against the law. :)
jergul large member	Thu May 01 06:08:37 You are too old to be so gay HR. Stop spamming the mod thread.
Allahuakbar Member	Thu May 01 06:15:58 Benaghzi should be a much bigger topic in the US media.
jergul large member	Thu May 01 06:21:18 "Kjøp Prison Architect Name in Game Includes the Standard, Aficionado, and Introversioner, PLUS the ability to name a prisoner and write his bio." Don't tempt me HR. It only costs an extra buck.
Hot Rod Revved Up	Thu May 01 08:03:32 Please stop trying to wreck the thread.
Hot Rod Revved Up	Thu May 01 10:09:00 A General just gave testimony that under the policy at the time the military was supposed to get a request from The State Department before they could intervene. The request never came.
jergul large member	Thu May 01 10:29:21 While in fact the military would need authorization from Congress as only congress can declare war. Above is for constitutionalists who believe words have certain meanings. Going to war but calling it something else would still need a declaration of war.
Aeros Member	Thu May 01 11:00:28 Poor Hot Rod, he still has not embraced Jesus' love for him! the answers you seek are in the bible rod! Why can't you see it?!
swordtail Anarchist Prime	Thu May 01 12:05:41 http://www...-smoke-on-benghazi-smoking-gun
Hot Rod Revved Up	Thu May 01 16:38:11 jergul, sending troops to protect our embassies or consulates when they are under attack is not war or even an act of war. It is protecting what is ours. BTW, that is the job of your military too, if not then they are even more worthless than I previously thought.
Rugian Member	Thu May 01 16:40:33 "jergul, sending troops to protect our embassies or consulates when they are under attack is not war or even an act of war. It is protecting what is ours." You really don't want to be advocating this, Hot Rod. What if, say, a large protest took place outside of the Russian embassy in DC - would Russian special forces be allowed to take up positions in our federal capital under the guise of protecting their citizens?
jergul large member	Thu May 01 16:42:17 Hot Rod It is an act of war unless you have an invitation by the host nation. I am not saying it would be wrong to declare war, I am just saying the State Department cannot do it. You interpretation does however match Putin's understanding, so you do have some folks on your side.
jergul large member	Thu May 01 16:44:02 Though...Putin did make sure his equivalent of the US Congress passed laws authorizing him. So I guess you are alone after all.
Hot Rod Revved Up	Thu May 01 17:14:15 swordtail, your link is all wrong. First of all, Judicial Watch requested *ONLY* documents directly related to Benghazi and they were given this email along with others. Secondly, Benghazi is mentioned in the title of the email. Thirdly, Ben Rhodes Ben Rhodes is not just a national security staffer. He is an an ***assistant to the president*** and deputy national security adviser for strategic communications. Fourthly, he sent to a dozen members of the administration's inner circle, including key members of the White House communications team such as Press Secretary Jay Carney. This proves that the highest levels in The White House were aware that a cover up of the actual events was being implemented. Fifthly, every official on the ground in Libya were in unanimous agreement that night that it was a terrorist attack. An analyst in Washington decided it was about the video and that is what the decision makers in Washington went with. Sixthly- U.S. Air Force Brig. Gen. Robert Lovell (Retired) told the House Committee on Government Oversight and Reform that U.S. forces "should have tried" to get to the embassy in time to help save the lives of Ambassador Chris Stevens and three other Americans who were killed by militants in twin attacks the night of Sept. 11, 2012. He said the State Department should have made stronger requests for action. The way it is set up is the military cannot take such actions without a request from The State Department. You liberals need to give it up. There is absolutely no doubt that there was a coverup to protect the president and to help his reelection.
Hot Rod Revved Up	Thu May 01 17:33:59 Rugian - What if, say, a large protest took place outside of the Russian embassy in DC - would Russian special forces be allowed to take up positions in our federal capital under the guise of protecting their citizens? No, because we would use our resources to protect their embassy, just as they would protect our embassy if the demonstration was there. This would hold true if the embassies were under attack. Both Russia and ourselves. But in third world countries where terrorists are allowed to roam the streets the situation is totally different. Unfortunately we have to keep a diplomatic presence in those countries. Hell, even Carter tried to do it in Iraq, but the government had allowed our military to deteriorate to where his effort failed. There is a lesson to be learned there.
Hot Rod Revved Up	Thu May 01 17:37:21 You keep saying that jergul, but it is nothing but hogwash.
jergul large member	Thu May 01 18:45:12 Not to you. Because you believe the President can circumvent the constitution by calling war something other than war. You should take that up in a free speech zone.
Hot Rod Revved Up	Thu May 01 19:23:33 jergul, tell me something. Our Navy Seals are doing black ops in foreign countries all of the time, so is Force Recon for that matter. Do you expect The United States to declare war every time one of those ops are scheduled?
Cloud Strife Member	Fri May 02 01:30:50 Benghazi!!!
jergul large member	Fri May 02 03:51:20 Hot Rod Either secure an invitation by the host nation or declare war on the host country or be unconstitutional. Its not important to people who don't care about the constitution, or who think words mean anything they want them to mean. But hell, you ignore the constitution all the time. So why not here too?
Hot Rod Revved Up	Fri May 02 08:53:05 You must be being facetious. The attack in Benghazi lasted about seven hours. You expect The United States to gather a joint session of Congress, get them to decide to declare war, have the President sign off on it and get troops there in time to save lives. Nope, if American citizens are under attack in a situation like Benghazi our troops should be sent in as quickly as possible in order to protect them. Of course in the scenario we are discussing this didn't happen because the State Department did not request it. I know this is a stretch, but what if you were in Sweden and you were in your embassy there for some reason. Let's say your embassy came under a heavy weapons attack as happened in Benghazi. Let's say they are Al Qaeda terrorists and the Swedish government decides to do nothing, even though they are obligated to protect your embassy, because they did not want to offend their Muslim community. Would you expect to stand there and die or would you expect your country to send troops to extract you safely?
	show deleted posts

Your Name:
Your Password:
Your Message: