Tag Archives: libya

What’s John McCain bitter about today? Same thing as yesterday…

Posted on by

Charlie Pierce explains McCain’s whole Benghazi / Susan Rice dilemma:

“This whole long con has passed now into the realm of pure McCarthyism: “We are significantly troubled by many of the answers that we got and some that we didn’t get,” said McCain, an Arizona Republican. “It is clear the information that [Rice] gave the American people was incorrect when she said it was a spontaneous demonstration triggered by a hateful video. It was not, and there was compelling evidence at the time that that was certainly not the case.”

No details. Nothing specific. Just John McCain, being troubled, as he has been since the country declined to make him its president. What happened with Rice and the talking-points, and why it happened, has been explained at length by everyone closely involved in the episode, including David Petraeus… McCain and Graham — and the hapless Ayotte, who is clearly, and pathetically, looking past Rice all the way to the 2016 Iowa caucuses — have nothing. They want to beat up on Rice simply because they can’t beat up on the president, although McCain made a run at that over the weekend. And they came out of the meeting and ran their mouths about what went on because they knew Rice wasn’t going to go into details of that meeting in public. They are a pair of cowards, with a feckless rookie in train, and they are playing dangerous games with the country’s security. They hereafter should be ignored and, if Graham goes through with his threat of putting a hold on Rice’s nomination, Harry Reid should move his desk out onto Constitution Avenue, and no Democrat should cooperate with this clown ever again.”

Benghazi: Petraeus testifies, John McCain (finally) shuts up

Posted on by

On Friday the Republican politicians who had so angrily demanded the testimony of David Petraeus about Benghazi got what they wanted – and what they deserved – when the former CIA director set forth the facts proving that their conspiracy theories and witch-hunts are dead wrong.

Appearing behind closed doors on Capitol Hill, Gen. Petraeus, recently resigned from the spy agency over his illicit affair with biographer Paula Broadwell, answered questions from legislators concerning the tragic Sept. 11 assault that left Ambassador Chris Stevens and three other diplomatic personnel dead.

When the session concluded, Petraeus was spirited away. And Senator John McCain (R-AZ), whose criticism of the Obama administration over Benghazi has verged on hysterical, emerged from the hearing room with very little to say to the reporters waiting outside.

“General Petraeus’ briefing was comprehensive. I think it was important; it added to our ability to make judgments about what was clearly a failure of intelligence, and described his actions and that of his agency and their interactions with other agencies,” said McCain, adding, “I appreciate his service and his candor” before abruptly fleeing as reporters tried to question him.

— Joe Conason: Petraeus Testifies, McCain Shuts Up

McCain and Fox and the rest of the Benghazi Political Clown Show posse owe UN Ambassador Susan Rice a public apology. However that’s one press conference, maybe the only press conference, that John McCain will definitely not attend.

Senator Harry Reid calls John McCain on his Benghazi bullshit

Posted on by

“One of you, Senator McCain, has gone so far as to make the outrageous claim that this event was “worse than Watergate”—despite the fact that there is no evidence that any crime was committed, no evidence of any cover-up, and no evidence that the administration has characterized the incident in any way that has not been consistent with the Intelligence Community’s contemporaneous assessments.”

— Harry Reid, rejecting McCain’s request to form a Senate committee to investigate the attack on Benghazi last September. McCain had made the request in part because, per internal Senate rules, he’s term-limited out of his seat as ranking member of the Senate Armed Services Committee, and the formation of a new committee would allow him another perch from which to delve into the Benghazi matter. Reid derided McCain’s request as an attempt to use the Senate as “a venue for baseless partisan attacks,” and excoriated the senator for skipping a classified briefing on the incident in order to hold a press conference. source (via shortformblog)

Related: 

John McCain asked why he skipped Benghazi briefing: “Who the hell are you…?”

Posted on by

Huffington Post: 4:25 p.m. — CNN published a more detailed account of its exchange with McCain, in which, when asked why he wouldn’t comment on missing the briefing, the senator responded, “Who the hell are you to tell me I can or not?”

When CNN approached McCain in a Capitol hallway Thursday morning, the senator refused to comment about why he missed the briefing, which was conducted by top diplomatic, military and counter-terrorism officials. Instead, McCain got testy when pressed to say why he wasn’t there.

“I have no comment about my schedule and I’m not going to comment on how I spend my time to the media,” McCain said.

Asked why he wouldn’t comment, McCain grew agitated: “Because I have the right as a senator to have no comment and who the hell are you to tell me I can or not?”

When CNN noted that McCain had missed a key meeting on a subject the senator has been intensely upset about, McCain said, “I’m upset that you keep badgering me.”

The “Maverick” doesn’t like being called on his reindeer games.

John McCain skipped a classified briefing on Benghazi to hold a press conference

Posted on by

Who has time for actual facts and intelligence on anything when there are political games to be played? Not bitter, bitter John McCain, who’s still reeling from 2008.


image: ThinkProgress

Think Progress: On Thursday morning, CNN’s Dana Bash reported that McCain may have chosen to hold a joint press conference with Sens. Lindsey Graham (R-SC) and Kelly Ayotte (R-NH) rather than attend a closed-door briefing about the attacks: I have to tell you something that just happened on Capitol Hill, and that is our senate producer Ted Barrett just ran into John McCain and asked about something that we’re hearing from Democrats, which is John McCain is calling for more information to Congress, but he had a press conference yesterday instead of going to a closed briefing where administration officials were giving more information. Well, Ted Barrett asked John McCain about that, and it was apparently an intense very angry exchange and McCain simply would not comment on it at all. 

McCain’s fake concern over Benghazi

Dave Weigel: Josh Rogin reports that John McCain and Rand Paul, both of them very public critics of the administration over Benghazi, skipped yesterday’s private hearing on the debacle. And McCain spent basically the entirety of Wednesday criticizing the administration — TV in the morning, a press conference in the late morning, a Senate colloquy after President Obama attacked him.

156387338
image: Andrew Sullivan (Senators Kelly Ayotte (R-NH), Lindsey Graham (R-SC) and John McCain (R-AZ) speak during a news conference on the consulate attack in Benghazi, Libya. The Senators called for a ‘select’ committee, like during the Watergate era, to investigate the terrorist attack. By Chris Maddaloni/CQ Roll Call.)

Yesterday John McCain had plenty of time for demagoguery during a press conference on Bengazi – but had no time for a classified briefing about the attack

When GOP Sens. John McCain and Lindsey Graham stepped before the cameras Wednesday and renewed their calls for a Watergate-like committee to probe the Sept. 11 terrorist attack in Libya, their longtime partner — Sen. Joe Lieberman – was noticeably missing. Lieberman later emerged from a classified, closed-door briefing with a much different message: A special congressional committee is unnecessary — at least for now. Lieberman says his Homeland Security Committee could handle a broad investigation into the deadly Benghazi assault just fine.

…Maine Sen. Susan Collins, the top Republican on the Homeland Security and Government Affairs Committee, backed up her chairman, Lieberman, and dinged McCain, a member of the panel, for missing Wednesday’s nearly two-hour briefing in the Capitol.

Related: 

John McCain’s lawn: it’s dried up, bitter, and he wants you off it

It’s not that Mitt Romney has terrible policies. It’s that he’s a terrible human being.

Posted on by

AND HE DESPERATELY NEEDS TO HIDE THAT FACT!

topixpolitix: Mitt Romney hasn’t given a media interview for 23 days, or answered a press question for 22 days, according to Lawrence O’Donnell. During that time, Obama has been interviewed on the Tonight Show, on MTV, and in Rolling Stone, among other outlets.

The Washington Post’s Greg Sargent thinks the reason for Romney’s interview-shyness is more sinister: it’s a deliberate strategy to avoid “questions about the mounting instances of dishonesty his campaign has resorted to in the final stretch,” including his misleading auto ads in Ohio.

“In the race’s final days, Romney has adopted what you might call a Kamikaze strategy. His campaign is cranking out a startling number of falsehoods and sleazy attacks, drawing widespread condemnation in the media that could ultimately crash his campaign, because that condemnation dovetails with Obama’s closing character argument against him. [...]

All of this feeds directly into the final argument Obama is making about Romney’s character, integrity, and authenticity: He’ll shamelessly say anything to win and as a result you can’t trust him on anything, let alone to look out for your interests. Romney is banking that he can surf past all the media and Obama camp criticism on a wave of last minute ad spending. Refusing to answer questions from the press is central to pulling that off. If Romney were to take questions from reporters, he’d be asked to answer for all of this stuff.

After all, when reporters do press him on his dishonesty and/or evasions, the results aren’t pretty. Romney faced harsh criticism for his refusal to answer questions about whether he still agreed with his previous suggestion that he favors transferring FEMA responsibilities to the states. And as Steve Benen notes, the statement he finally did release on FEMA didn’t put to bed lingering questions about his position.

None of this is to say Romney’s closing strategy can’t work. But it’s a pretty massive and audacious gamble on his part.”

The Rude Pundit: “See, we use the cute phrase “flip-flop” to describe Romney’s change in positions. But they’re not mere shifts in position. They’re lies that get to the core of the man’s beliefs, such as they aren’t. And we could ask if Romney was lying in the past, when he was very moderate, then intensely conservative, or now, when he’s somewhat more moderate again. But, except for abortion, Romney refuses to admit that he’s changed his position. That’s the big lie, the one he has gotten away with more than any other, the one that’s winked at as if “That’s just Mitt.” It’s not that Mitt Romney has terrible policies. It’s that he’s a terrible human being.”

Exploiting Hurricane Sandy: How will Mitt Romney attempt it?

Posted on by

Kevin Drum and a friend discussed the possibilities yesterday: 

Friend: This may be the election right here. If Obama can look like he’s handling this competently and in control he should be okay. But I’m sure Romney’s people are all in a room trying to figure out how to make this Obama’s Katrina.

Me: Benghazi didn’t work for them, so Sandy is their last hope. But I do think this is a challenge for Romney. Any criticism will look nakedly opportunistic unless there’s really a good reason for it. I think the press is probably waiting for Romney to say something obviously excessive.

Friend: I’d watch Drudge for the cues. He should have a picture of a stranded black person up at some point tomorrow.

The wingers will certainly be looking for some kind of Sandy-related incompetence to hang on Obama, but I really do think the press will be on the watch for this and ready to pounce. It’s such an obvious thing for a desperate campaign to do, and exploiting a tragedy like this a week before an election would a little too raw even for our conflict-loving media. Unless Obama really screws up something badly, Romney would probably be best served by quietly telling his surrogates to cool it on Sandy.

MEANWHILE, Romney was actually very busy yesterday — exploiting the disaster and playing politics. Via Addicting Info: 

1. Romney Batters President While Sandy Batters Coast

As Hurricane Sandy started bearing down on the Eastern Seaboard on Monday morning, Obama was in the situation room with top advisors, planning his deployment of aid to the 60 million Americans who are threatened by the storm.

“Obviously, my first priority has to be to make sure everything is in place to help the families and prepare,” Obama said today. The President has canceled campaign events for the next few days to focus his full attention on responding to the hurricane.

Elsewhere, Romney didn’t relent in his attempts to gain an edge in the swing states of Ohio and Iowa, even while cities on the East Coast started to flood on Monday. “I know they are chanting ‘four more years’ [for Obama], but we’re chanting all over this country ‘nine more days,’” Romney said callously, as the nation braced for catastrophe. After campaigning all day on Monday, the Romney campaign has reported cancellations for an event on Monday night and Tuesday.

2. Romney’s Impeding Red Cross Relief Efforts

This blunder is reminiscent of Paul Ryan’s fake photo-op visit to the soup kitchen. Romney’s team is reportedly gathering supplies to gain points with Virginia swing voters, but they’re not demonstrating their compassion as much as their ignorance of how officials operate in a disaster situation.

Even I know that, if you truly want to help, you should communicate with the agency you are seeking to assist – or just check its website.

According to the Red Cross:

Unfortunately, due to logistical constraints the Red Cross does not accept or solicit individual donations or collections of items. Items such as collected food, used clothing and shoes must be sorted, cleaned, repackaged and transported which impedes the valuable resources of money, time, and personnel.

3. Romney’s Playing Partisan Favorites With Calls To Governors

Gov. Romney has made calls exclusively to Republican Governors, namely Bob McDonnell (R-Va.) and Chris Christie (R-N.J.), to offer support and talk about storm preparation.

Romney is seemingly unconcerned about Dem-led states in the storm’s path, neglecting to call any Democratic governors bracing for the storm in states such as Maryland (Gov. O’Malley), Massachusetts (Gov. Patrick), New York (Gov. Cuomo), and North Carolina (Gov. Perdue). And it’s Romney who wrongly accuses Obama of rejecting bi-partisanship.

Of course, Obama hasn’t played any partisan favorites. Gov. Christie said today of Obama’s response efforts: “I appreciated the president’s outreach today in making sure that we know he’s watching this and is concerned about the health and welfare and safety of the people of the state of New Jersey.”

Continue reading….

Fox “news” focusing on the big issues today:

via: dropfox

Mitt Romney isn’t qualified to run U.S. Foreign Policy

Posted on by

When conservatives want to put another version of George W. Bush in charge of U.S. foreign policy:


…

OFA: In a series of interviews, Former Secretary of State Madeleine Albright, Senator John Kerry, Admiral John Nathman (ret.), and Former Under Secretary of Defense for Policy Michèle Flournoy explain why Mitt Romney is not prepared to be commander-in-chief. They each lay out how President Obama’s leadership has made America stronger, safer and more secure while Mitt Romney has nothing to offer except bluster, chest-thumping, and a commitment to endless war. As Monday’s debate will demonstrate, blunder and bluster are no substitute for strong leadership.

And this:

Mitt Romney’s Neocon War Cabinet: “Romney is loath to mention Bush on the campaign trail, for obvious reasons, but today they sound like ideological soul mates on foreign policy. Listening to Romney, you’d never know that Bush left office bogged down by two unpopular wars that cost America dearly in blood and treasure. Of Romney’s forty identified foreign policy advisers, more than 70 percent worked for Bush. Many hail from the neoconservative wing of the party, were enthusiastic backers of the Iraq War and are proponents of a US or Israeli attack on Iran. Christopher Preble, a foreign policy expert at the Cato Institute, says, “Romney’s likely to be in the mold of George W. Bush when it comes to foreign policy if he were elected.”

For SOME reason, Mitt Romney doesn’t want to talk about Libya anymore…

Posted on by

He got got.

Buzzfeed: “Asked why the issue was absent from Romney’s public remarks, senior adviser Kevin Madden told BuzzFeed the campaign decided to focus their post-debate Virginia swing on exposing Obama’s lack of specific proposals, and challenge him on gas prices and the economy.”

First Read: “This also caught our eye yesterday: Romney didn’t mention Libya — or the exchange on the topic from Tuesday’s debate — during two campaign stops in Virginia yesterday. Instead, Romney focused on the economy and what he said was Obama’s failure to lay out a vision for a second term.”

“Declaring something an act of terror does not necessarily mean you are declaring it a terror attack.” — Megyn Kelly of Fox “news,” now disputing the meaning of words, proper syntax, and grammar in addition to everything else.

Other reasons? 

Stephen Colbert on Fox’s reaction to Candy Crowley

Posted on by

“For most of the play, John Wilkes Booth set there politely, but it was the moment when he didn’t that made history. And I thought this was the definitive point in this debate.” — Tucker Carlson, referring to Candy Crowley’s fact check of Romney.

  
  
  

Facts? Why would voters want facts?

Source: sandandglass

Mitt Romney: the GOP’s very own geopolitical disaster

Posted on by

Nicholas Kristof: “DIPLOMACY is a minefield, and Mitt Romney spent the last week blowing up his foreign policy credentials to be president. He raised doubts about his capacity to deal with global crises, and we were left hoping that if that 3 a.m. call ever went to him, he’d have set up call forwarding.

“The essential problem is that every time Romney touches foreign policy, he breaks things. He went on a friendly trip to Britain — the easiest possible test for a candidate, akin to rolling off a log — and endeared himself by questioning London’s readiness to host the Olympic Games. In the resulting firestorm, one newspaper, The Sun, denounced “Mitt the Twit.”

“[...] Then there was the Romney trip to Israel, where he insulted Palestinians and left some Jews uncomfortable with stereotyping by praising Jewish culture in the context of making money. Hmm.

“[...] Yet with the Middle East exploding in recent days because of a video insulting the Prophet Muhammad, Romney dived in with a statement that hit a trifecta: it was erroneous, inflammatory and offensive.”

And let’s not forget how Romney recently broke things with Vladimir Putin and Russia…

The Associated Press joins Team Romney: cleaning up Mitt’s messes

Posted on by

Josh Marshall takes the AP to task for either lying for Mitt Romney or for not challenging Romney’s obvious lies about the actual timeline of events regarding his criticisms of President Obama and the embassy attacks:

“…a new AP report suggests that the reason the Romney campaign repeatedly lied about the order of events in Egypt and Libya Tuesday night (US time) was because he wasn’t yet getting those briefings.

“…Romney came out late Tuesday evening with a scathing press release accusing the administration of offering sympathy to the attacks as its initial response to the attacks on US diplomatic compounds in Egypt and Libya. Of course, the statement referenced was issued by the Cairo Embassy before the attacks started. So the whole thing was a falsehood from the git-go — not even getting into the preposterous claim that the embassy’s press release constituted an apology.”

Marshall points out two items that prove Romney knew exactly what was happening prior to his statement released on Tuesday night:

  • No one needed a security briefing to know what had happened here. All the contemporaneous press reports (some noted here), which preceded Romney’s statement, noted that the statement came before the attacks.
  • Initial press reports can turn out to be wrong, of course. But you can’t claim that you were misinformed by press reports that didn’t exist.  

The AP report:

What if a sociopath wanted to run for president?

Posted on by

“Sometimes it helps to laugh. But Romney’s smirk is disturbing. It betrays a preternatural sense of entitlement and self-satisfaction that comes out, often inappropriately, in all sorts of ways, from his odd remark that “I like to be able to fire people that provide services to me” to insulting the cookies supporters served him or the rain gear fans wore to a NASCAR event. It seems related to the calm self-importance with which he belittled British planning for the Olympics, insulting our closest ally. The smirk is a cousin to another odd Romney tic – his tendency to chuckle at the wrong time, like when he was trying to deny cutting the hair of a gay high school classmate. Who chuckles when they’re trying to project compassion?”

— Joan Walsh, “Romney’s haunting smirk” (via: salon)