May 10, 2013

Two bits of dialogue from my all-time favorite movie “All The President’s Men” come to mind. The first is during that classic staff meeting where they’re discussing the content of the next day’s edition:

Harry Rosenfeld (Jack Warner): “What about the Dahlberg repurcussions?”

Howard Simons (Martin Balsam): “No one cares about the Dahlberg repurcussions.”

…and that scene inside Ben Bradlee’s office where he’s having a hard understanding the significance of Woodward and Bernstein’s reporting:

Ben Bradlee (Jason Robards): Have you seen the latest polls? Most Americans have never even heard about Watergate. No one gives a shit.”

Keep this in mind as the mainstream dino-media does all it can to avoid reporting on the 9/11 Benghazi attacks that left Ambassador Chris Stevens and three others dead. The Obama administration’s story (actually, lies) about how it was the fault of a little YouTube video and how there’s was no time to scramble military assistance to repel the attackers is unraveling before everyone’s eyes; just don’t expect to read or hear about it from the major media outlets – yet.

It’s important to remember that what did Richard Nixon in was not the actual break-in and the illegal wiretapping that the White House and his Justice Department authorized, but the cover-up and obstruction of justice that took place afterwards. If the Obama administration continues to think itself above the law and congressional oversight it may well find itself repeating the same kind of history. As Red State’s Moe Lane writes:

And let us establish once and for all what happened. The screw-up was in two parts. The first was tactical: the administration made a judgment call on whether or not to (metaphorically) send in the Marines. They decided not to. People died. Did that make it a bad call? Maybe. Maybe not. Sometimes the dice hate you. Maybe if the Marines had been sent in the whole thing would have gone spectacularly pear-shaped and we’d have a hundred people dead, not four. But then again, maybe nobody would have died at all. Generally speaking, it’s a lot easier to justify We don’t throw lives away for no good reason than it is to justify We’d rather let four people die than risk a hundred. Still, it’s a hard call to make when it’s you on the scene.

But the second part of the screw-up is less forgivable. The general rule here is Command takes responsibility. JFK survived the Bay of Pigs incident because he embraced that rule. Nixon didn’t survive Watergate because he didn’t. If Obama had said, well, we thought that we had good security up at Benghazi, only we didn’t, so al-Qaeda caught us by surprise and killed our people and that was something that I have to take full responsibility for and I’m never going to let that happen again then, well, he might have lost the election, actually. We didn’t realize at the time, but Obama’s 2012 re-election strategy had pretty much no margin for error. So the administration picked a narrative (it was all due to a YouTube video!) that cynically traded on stereotypes about foreign Muslims and their collective level of impulse control*, and did nothing but push said narrative for as long as they could. Which was, oddly enough, long enough for the election to be over.

It’s debatable what role the President might have played in all of this up to this point, but it’s fairly obvious the reckless incompetence, and ultimate responsibility, for the deaths of the Benghazi four lies at the feet of former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s State Department. Powerline blog’s Paul Mirengoff has a powerful post that makes this case by laying out the facts the major print and broadcast media dare not present:

Under these circumstances, it would not do to attribute the Benghazi killings to the terrorism about which top State Department officials had been warned. Much better to lump what happened in Libya together with the protests that occurred in Egypt, and thereby characterize it as a demonstration that went too far, rather than premeditated terrorism.

Was Hillary Clinton directly involved in this cover-up? It’s difficult to see how she could not have been.

As I understand it, when State pushed back against the CIA’s talking points, a White House meeting was scheduled to thrash out the issue. One can imagine Clinton failing to keep apprised of something as mundane as a mounting threat to be safety of her personnel in Libya. But surely she was in the loop when it came to a bureaucratic struggle about how our U.N. ambassador was going to spin the Benghazi debacle. And surely, her representatives would not attend the meeting in which that bureaucratic struggle was to be resolved without being able to state the desires of the Secretary of State.

Hillary Clinton, then, is culpable at the front end of the Benghazi disaster — when she and/or her agents ignored requests for enhanced security — and at the back end — when she and her agents engineered an attempted cover-up. Her culpability during the attacks is doubtful in my opinion, but I would still like to know what she was doing during those tragic hours.

In a serious society, Benghazi, standing alone, would spell the end of Hillary Clinton’s public career.

Of course, in a serious society, the very idea that someone like Hillary Clinton would be qualified to be Secretary of State is laughable. So let’s lay out the facts as we know them:

1. Hillary Clinton lied in her testimony to Congress. Note this was not done under oath and thus not subject to perjury charges, but I have a feeling she’ll be back and forced to sing like a canary under oath before too long.

2. President Obama went to sleep knowing that a U.S. ambassador and other Americans were being attacked by terrorists in Benghazi.

3. President Obama awoke refreshed the next day and headed to Las Vegas to fund-raise knowing his Libyan ambassador and three others were dead.

4. The entire Executive Branch lied repeatedly to the American people in order to save Obama’s chances for re-election.

Like I and many others have said previously, at least when it came to Watergate no one died. What is happening here is an absolute disgrace, but chickens all over the place are coming home to roost. Now that the dam of coverup, dismissal, and denial is breaking and all hell is about to bvreak loose.

And it couldn’t happen to a more deserving bunch of people.

UPDATE: I hate to say I told you so, but no one listens to The Great White Shank. It’s amazing how much stuff I post finds its way into the blogsphere the next day. Check this Hot Air post by Ed Morrissey out: now that both ABC and Obama shill Ron Fournier have gotten wind of significant talking point revisions made to the original CIA memo to whitewash (do I hear “cover up”) any references to a terror attack, is there any doubt the dam is truly about to break into scandal territory.

Expect Speaker of the House John Boehner to appoint a select investigation committee with the power to issue subpoenas and then watch all the canaries start to sing. And don’t be surprised if one of the tunes whistled is “Hail To The Chief” – this story is about to go all the way to the Oval Office, where it will become apparent that it was President Obama who gave the orders not to help those poor folks under attack, then tried to cover up his cowardice and lack of command off by blaming the whole thing on a YouTube video, then lied about it repeatedly to the families of the dead and the American people.

The sound you’re hearing is toast being made.

Filed in: Politics & World Events by The Great White Shank at 00:32 | Comments Off on Obama’s Watergate?
No Comments

No comments yet.

RSS feed for comments on this post.

Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.


Search The Site

Recent Items


September 2021
April 2021
January 2021
December 2020
November 2020
October 2020
September 2020
August 2020
July 2020
June 2020
May 2020
April 2020
March 2020
February 2020
January 2020
December 2019
November 2019
October 2019
September 2019
August 2019
July 2019
June 2019
May 2019
April 2019
March 2019
February 2019
January 2019
December 2018
November 2018
October 2018
September 2018
August 2018
July 2018
June 2018
May 2018
April 2018
March 2018
February 2018
January 2018
December 2017
November 2017
October 2017
September 2017
August 2017
July 2017
June 2017
May 2017
April 2017
March 2017
February 2017
January 2017
December 2016
November 2016
October 2016
September 2016
August 2016
July 2016
June 2016
May 2016
April 2016
March 2016
February 2016
January 2016
December 2015
November 2015
October 2015
September 2015
August 2015
July 2015
June 2015
May 2015
April 2015
March 2015
February 2015
January 2015
December 2014
November 2014
October 2014
September 2014
August 2014
July 2014
June 2014
May 2014
April 2014
March 2014
February 2014
January 2014
December 2013
November 2013
October 2013
September 2013
August 2013
July 2013
June 2013
May 2013
April 2013
March 2013
February 2013
January 2013
December 2012
November 2012
October 2012
September 2012
August 2012
July 2012
June 2012
May 2012
April 2012
March 2012
February 2012
January 2012
December 2011
November 2011
October 2011
September 2011
August 2011
July 2011
June 2011
May 2011
April 2011
March 2011
February 2011
January 2011
December 2010
November 2010
October 2010
September 2010
August 2010
July 2010
June 2010
May 2010
April 2010
March 2010
February 2010
January 2010
December 2009
November 2009
October 2009
September 2009
August 2009
July 2009
June 2009
May 2009
April 2009
March 2009
February 2009
January 2009
December 2008
November 2008
October 2008
September 2008
August 2008
July 2008
June 2008
May 2008
April 2008
March 2008
February 2008
January 2008
December 2007
November 2007
October 2007
September 2007
August 2007
July 2007
June 2007
May 2007
April 2007
March 2007
February 2007
January 2007
December 2006
November 2006
October 2006
September 2006
August 2006
July 2006
June 2006
May 2006
April 2006
March 2006
February 2006
January 2006



4 Goodboys Only

Site Info