"Leaks" Vs. Collusion Redux: Senate Intel Committee Hearing Shows Why Independent Investigation Is Needed

Porcine eyes dim with bluster, Lindsey Graham lies at yesterday's Senate Intel Committee hearing by asserting intelligence agencies found "no evidence of collusion" with Russians. Numerous Dems had to correct him on that, but it opened the door to GOOP stonewalling and why an independent investigation is needed.

Sadly, as in the case of the House Intelligence Committee Hearings in March, the Senate Intel Committee counterpart also devolved into a war of memes: "leaks" vs. collusions. The obdurate GOP bunch, including Lindsey Graham, Chuck Grassley, Joe Cornyn and Ted Cruz - determined to stonewall on the collusion aspect - kept a common refrain of question aimed at Sally Yates and former DNI James Clapper: "Have you ever forwarded or approved of the release of classified files and information to non-governmental sources?"

Another clodhopper numskull with the actual name of  "John Kennedy" - if you can believe it - had the temerity to ask Sally Yates if she felt like she "belonged on the Supreme Court" because she challenged Trump's illegal travel ban "executive order". An order, I might add, that possessed all the heft and legally consistent substance of a torn page from a child's coloring book.

This gaggle of Repuke clowns tried to make hay out of this deflecting BS, as well as the "unmasking" of Michael Flynn as a compromised stooge of the Russkies.  By contrast to these turkeys, former acting US attorney general Sally Yates was totally professional in her bearing and answers.  Though provoked numerous times by the mostly irrelevant "who's the leakers" drivel of the GOP side, she never lost her cool. Testifying for the first time about her knowledge of contacts between the Trump camp and Moscow, Ms. Yates said that she requested an urgent meeting with the White House counsel, Don McGahn, after she became aware that the White House had made false public statements about Flynn’s contacts with the Russian ambassador to Washington, Sergey Kislyak.

White House officials including the vice-president, Mike Pence, had stated that Flynn and Kislyak had simply exchanged pleasantries and talked about arranging a future meeting between Trump and the Russian president, Vladimir Putin.  It later emerged that the conversations were more extensive and included discussion of sanctions imposed on Russia by the Obama administration. Ms. Yates said that she telephoned McGahn on the morning of 26 January, two days after the FBI interviewed Flynn about the contacts and had given her a detailed readout of the interview. She told McGahn she needed to meet him in person because what she had to say was so sensitive.

Yates and a senior justice department colleague met McGahn the same afternoon in a secure room in the White House and told him that statements made by Pence and other administration officials about Flynn’s behavior were untrue, and that “Flynn’s underlying conduct was problematic in and of itself”.

McGahn called Yates back to the White House on 27 January and put further questions to her about Flynn. According to her Senate testimony, the White House counsel asked her: “Why does it matter to the Department of Justice whether one White House official lies to another White House official?”
“We explained to him that it’s a lot more than that,” Yates said. “We also said that we weren’t the only ones who knew this. The Russians also knew what General Flynn had done and that what Pence said was not true. The Russians not only knew this but they also likely had proof.”

Yates said she could not speak about statutes under which Flynn might be prosecuted without revealing classified information about the investigation, but she told McGahn that any White House action on Flynn would not interfere with the FBI investigation as he had already been interviewed.
Subsequently, McGahn asked Yates whether he or his staff could come to the justice department to review classified evidence of Flynn’s conduct. Yates consulted the FBI over the weekend and called McGahn back on Monday, January 30th, and said White House officials could come to the department to review the material.

She added that she did not know if McGahn or his staff took up her offer, as that was her last day at the department: Trump fired her on the night of January 30th, ostensibly because she had refused to defend his executive order to do with the travel ban. But more likely because Ms. Yates brought the Flynn matter to attention.

All that ought to have gotten through the skull of any person of normal intelligence, but not the "leaks first"  Reepo brigade. Every time it was one of their Committee members turn they beat the "leaks" drum into insensibility.  This despite the fact - as former Nixon WH counsel John Dean observed in several interviews the past few months:  "leaks to the press are vital to democracy".  Indeed they have the same import and value as whistle blowing on the power mongers, especially when they are acting without any transparency.  There are then, some laws that trump immediate "security" laws because they pay homage to the Constitution above all else

This was underscored in a recent piece in the Columbia Journalism Review  entitled 'Flynn Resignation Shows Leaks Under Trump Are Working - Keep 'Em Coming"  The author argued, and I totally agree - that it is not unlawful for journalists to receive and publish leaked information from anonymous sources.  Those sources can also include intelligence officers if their leaks provide insight into national security transgressions with an import than trumps the USC or other legalistic violations themselves. Hence, the exposure of Flynn - then national security adviser to Trump- was more important than him possibly being compromised in his position. The law "breakage" therefore was done under the aegis of a national security that trumped the national security associated with classified info leakage.

Even conservative Joe Scarborough on his Feb. 15  show commended whoever leaked the information on Flynn, noting:

"The only reason we're finding out about it now is because a patriot did leak this to the Washington Post. Did get this information out there or else we wouldn't even have known about it."

Then there was John Cornyn trying to grandstand by making hay out of national security adviser Susan E. Rice  "refusing to appear before the committee to answer our questions about unmaksing". But why should she have? There were no questions that merited her wasting time stroking Reepo egos and stonewalling by an appearance.  Ms. Rice’s actions were not unusual or unlawful as numerous security officials have pointed out. Whenever Americans are swept up in surveillance of foreign officials by intelligence agencies, their identities are supposed to be obscured, but they can be revealed  ("unmasked") for national security reasons, and intelligence officials say it is a regular occurrence.

Former CIA Assistant Director John McLaughlin, interviewed on MSNBC April 4, said:

"Susan Rice was merely doing her job. Occasionally these reports refer to foreigners contacting Americans about something so the national security adviser has the option of asking the FBI, or the National Security Agency if it can be justified to let her know who those people are- and often to protect them. Sometimes you want to go to an American and say, 'you should know who you've been I contact with'.   This is done quietly and not spread around the government, And people that make decisions for unmasking someone have a very high bar for doing it, it isn't done casually,  So I think she was basically just doing her job as she should have been doing it."

So again we behold the GOP  paranoia - without a whit of evidence - getting the better of them, as well as of Trump when he accused Ms. Rice of a "crime". Thus, no surprise that a spokeswoman for Ms. Rice, Erin Pelton, said in an email, “I’m not going to dignify the president’s ludicrous charge with a comment.”  As well she shouldn't, because we have run amok Reepos - like Corynyn and Lindsey Graham- who have no sense or shame, attempting to make hay out of nothing. After all, look how they went after Ms. Rice in the Benghazi spectacle - when real security norms were transgressed - by the REEPOS! (Trey Gowdy inadvertently blowing the cover of a CIA source. With goons like these who needs enemies?)

The most aggravating aspect of yesterday's hearings was the way the REEP clowns continually tried to dismiss or diminish the collusion aspect with Lindsey Graham at one point even off-handedly referring to the "claims of some guy in England".   That was none other than Christopher Steele and he wasn't just "some guy" but a former MI6 agent - the UK equivalent of the CIA.  Over a year ago, Steele had uncovered  a  plot to torpedo the 2016 U.S. general election using disinformation as well as outright hacking of both parties' computers, although only using the gathered material against one. In addition, an annex to the released intelligence report disclosed high level conspiratorial shenanigans involving the Trump team and Russian counterparts as well as compromising material collected on Trump when he was in Moscow in 2013 for a "Miss Universe" beauty pageant.

As revealed by Mr. Steele in his last interview (with David Corn, published in 'Mother Jones'  4 months ago) before going underground, the material gathered in memos was considered so explosive that he turned it over to contacts he had in the FBI last summer. This was without informing the opposition research group for which he'd initially begun his project. The FBI, despite this explosive stuff sitting on its shelves, chose instead to go after Hillary Clinton with damning insinuations of guilt over her email server, as opposed to parsing and exposing the Steele material.

While the intelligence community (including former DNI Clapper yesterday)  has been playing it coy saying they can't substantiate what's in the Steele dossier. or that it is "raw intelligence" and doesn't "prove" anything, others have recognized that where there's smoke there's fire. In particular, contrary to a dopey Trump tweet months ago that Steele is a "failed spy" he was actually one of the UK's best on Russian matters. A highly regarded and respective intelligence operative who doesn't make shit up like Trump, or pull it out of his ass.

According to an earlier March AP report in the Denver Post ( 'Ex Spy Regarded as Dependable') :

"Three British intelligence agents interviewed by the Associated Press described Steele as well regarded in the intelligence community, with excellent Russian skills and high level sources."

According to one Financial Times account, Steele was the "UK intelligence expert on Russia".  James Nixey, the head of Chatham House's Russia and Eurasia program, informed the AP that sections of the dossier document created by Steele "read exactly as reports from the secret services"

In other words, professional through and through, no exaggerations and no fillers that hadn't been  sourced.   All of which tells me the only way we will get to the bottom of this morass is to enable Steele to testify - preferably before an independent commission. The reason is that the Repukes are too tied to Trump at the hip and will never become serious about any investigation. They desperately need him as the vehicle to push through their radical agenda on health care and tax cuts. So it would be a waste of time to invite Christopher Steele to testify unless Steele himself became convinced it wouldn't become a Repuke dog and pony show.

As long as the hearings are split along the lines of leaks vs. collusion, this is about all we can expect and I'm not even sure an independent prosecutor or investigation will make a definite difference. But it might. What we have sure isn't working.

Trump In Psycho Redux Tries To Link Susan Rice To His "Wiretaps"

Recall that exactly a month ago, the orange-haired baboon who sits in the Oval office  launched a series of tweets that began at 5.35am, scribbling in one : “Terrible! Just found out that Obama had my ‘wires tapped’ in Trump Tower just before the victory. Nothing found. This is McCarthyism!”

He followed up in the next half-hour with a string of deranged tweets claiming Obama had "defied a court rejection to tap his office", and invited a “good lawyer” to make a case against the alleged process.  Very swiftly, lawyer Ari Melber on MSNBC skewered Trump's psychotic delusions noting that if there was a wiretap it was more plausibly ORDERED by a judge on account of suspicion of criminal activity or collusion - possibly with a foreign power.  So in fact, Trump's tweets - as opposed to any victimization - could actually have been open admissions that he has something to be guilty about, if such wiretaps were actually FISA -warrant approved.

Melber's views were given major heft at the first and only televised meeting of the House Intelligence Committee  when FBI Director James Comey openly acknowledged before that the FBI was conducting an active investigation into the ties between the Trump campaign and Russians blew all Trumps' leak paranoid fantasies into a cocked hat.

Since then Trump and his devoted lackeys and trained monkeys - like Devin Nunes - have tried relentlessly to provide cover for the baboon -in -chief's insanity. Nunes, most notably and recently, acted in collusion with two 'dummy' sources (Michael Ellis and Ezra Cohen-Watnik)  to use ostensible "secret" documents that would shed light on Nunes' House investigation. In fact the documents were spurious, merely laundered, raw intel that Bannon and Cohen -Watnik massaged to make it look to dummy Devin as if he had something.

And like a trained monkey, Nunes obliged and played the role Bannon assigned him to a tee. In front of the press corps Nunes claimed he  "recently confirmed" that  "on numerous occasions the intelligence community had  incidentally collected info about U.S. citizens involved in the Trump transition."  

Of course, as that Nunes' trick has been exposed and shot down, Trump and his house of clowns had to find a new avenue to keep the spotlight off the Russian connection and collusion issue. So who to pick next? Why, the dignified former Obama national security adviser forced to wear a veritable crown of thorns during the Benghazi spectacle  - as Reepo lackeys rode their high horses to ever higher hypocrisy. (It was Republican budget cuts that sliced into embassy security around the world, including in Barbados).

Thus Trump asserted in a semi-coherent delusional state earlier today that he thought that the former national security adviser Susan E. Rice may have committed a crime by seeking the identities of Trump associates who were swept up in the surveillance of foreign officials by American spy agencies and that other Obama administration officials may also have been involved. The little stooge went on to blabber:

"I think it’s going to be the biggest story. It’s such an important story for our country and the world. It is one of the big stories of our time.”

Actually, you psycho dunce,, its a non-story. Merely another attempt at deflection to drive attention away from the core Russian hacking and collusion thread. Contrary to Trump's fulsome rubbish, current and former intelligence officials from both Republican and Democratic administrations have said that nothing they have seen led them to believe that Ms. Rice’s actions were unusual or unlawful. When Americans are swept up in surveillance of foreign officials by intelligence agencies, their identities are supposed to be obscured, but they can be revealed for national security reasons, and intelligence officials say it is a regular occurrence.

Former CIA Assistant Director John McLaughlin, interviewed last night, said:

"Susan Rice was merely doing her job. Occasionally these reports refer to foreigners contacting Americans about something so the national security adviser has the option of asking the FBI, or the National Security Agency if it can be justified to let her know who those people are- and often to protect them. Sometimes you want to go to an American and say, 'you should know who you've been I contact with'.   This is done quietly and not spread around the government, And people that make decisions for unmasking someone have a very high bar for doing it, it isn't done casually,  So I think she was basically just doing her job as she should have been doing it."

So again we see Trump's paranoia - without a whit of evidence - getting the better of him as he accused Ms. Rice of a "crime". Thus, no surprise that a spokeswoman for Ms. Rice, Erin Pelton, said in an email, “I’m not going to dignify the president’s ludicrous charge with a comment.”  As well she shouldn't, because we have run amok Reepos - like Rand Paul and Lindsey Graham- who have no sense or shame, and will make hay out of nothing. After all, look how they went after Ms. Rice in the Benghazi spectacle - when real security norms were transgressed - by the REEPOS! (Trey Gowdy inadvertently blowing the cover of a CIA source. With goons like these who needs enemies?)

In an interview on Tuesday with MSNBC, Ms. Rice said: “The allegation is that somehow the Obama administration officials utilized intelligence for political purposes. That’s absolutely false.”

The only one coming off as untrustworthy here is the baboon- in -chief, an asshole who has a history of promising to produce evidence to back up his unverified claims, and failing to do so.  Indeed, he didn't even make it clear what crime he was accusing Ms. Rice of committing. (As I noted earlier its legal and not unusual for a national security adviser to request the identities of Americans who are mentioned in intelligence reports.)

What we have then is a three ring circus, with the Orange Baboon the ringmaster, Devin 'Clouseau'  Nunes first clown, and the GOP 'wanna get Rice' assholes the junior clowns.  All of this done in an effort to launch a wild goose chase tangent to try to misdirect the intelligence committee investigation into the Russian ties to the Trumpies.. And in the process present laundered "evidence" that hey, Trump was really surveilled by that angry black man and former Prez Obama.

But in this light John McLaughlin's take is perhaps most spot on regarding Trump's original tweet:

"When he did that tweet I immediately called a friend and said 'we're going to have weeks and possibly months of turmoil for what was a foolish action.'  This has deepened the partisanship and made it much harder for this administration to do anything else it wants to do, such as health care and tax reform."

Bingo!  We can be sure if the past is any guide, this clown show and circus will continue, and the next proof will be if Susan Rice is actually called to testify in either one or both intel committees.


Update:   Some good news since yesterday's post. Bannon has been forced out of the National Security Council, most likely by Lt. Gen. McMaster putting his foot down. Don't believe the bull pocky that it was "just a realignment".. Yeah, right! And Area 51 aliens were behind it. Also, Devin Nunes stepped down from his Chairman position of the House Intel Committee, but not without blowing more smoke out of his ass. He claimed "leftwing activist groups with the Office of Congressional Ethics" forced him out. Which is the epitome of rank delusion and playing the victim card.  No, no one was to blame but the little Trump and Bannon pawn himself. But it is also interesting that the punk stepped down after Bannon was removed from the NSC. Connection? You bet!  Bannon overplayed his cards and both he and his pawn Nunes paid the price.

Now We Know: Benghazi Was Incited by Anti-Muslim Video - NOT Al Qaeda!

It's been over a year for the truth to finally emerge after all the hair-on-fire screeching over Benghazi by the Repukes last year before the general election.  To refresh people's memories, an attack occurred on the U.S. Embassy in Benghazi, Libya on Sept. 11, 2012 - costing the life of Ambassador Christopher J. Stephens. The disgusting Repukes then attempted to turn it into a 9/11 style Al Qaeda terror attack that caught Obama sleeping at the switch as well as Susan Rice. It cost Rice her job at State, and even put Hillary under intense scrutiny with hearings by the eternally outraged Re-punk,. Darryl Issa (CA).

Knowing that a vile anti-Muslim video had surfaced in the days before, I never bought any of this politically inspired bunkum.  Indeed, in my Sept. 14, 2012 blog post ('Getting a Grip on Reality - The Fake Film And Muslim Outrage') I noted:

"Now, as 11 Muslim nations – from the Sudan, to Egypt to Yemen, Pakistan, Iran and Indonesia go up in flames and riots, and 4 Americans have been left dead in Libya (Btw, NO Marines! There were two former Navy Seals killed and a civilian USAID worker apart from Ambassador Stevens). Questions are being asked as to: Who started it?, and What was this film? – what was the nature of it?

Some deluded nabobs have posed the issue as “free speech”, and that the film maker – who until recently remained hidden – had the right to portray what he wanted, without fear of distant uprisings, bloodshed or reprisals. But that specious speech cover does not apply to a film 'maker' who lies about his identity and especially the film title itself (in misrepresenting it and the film's featured characters to the actors), as well as the origins of the financial backers.

In the wake of the investigation by Brian Ross of ABC News, e.g.http://abcnews.go.com/WNT/video/anti-islam-film-producer-guilty-drug-fraud-charges-17231542

we now know this "movie" and its dubious maker add to a steaming pile of vile horse shit. A better characterization might be a 'drive by' on celluloid.) The guy who made the film wasn’t a "Sam Bacile" (the identity he originally gave) or a Jew at all, but a twice- convicted felon (for meth making and financial crimes) and Xtian Egyptian.

This twice-convicted (and until recently, imprisoned) methamphetamine maker and bank fraud perp, Nakoula Basselly Nakoula, adopted the nom-de-plume “Sam Bacile” for the purposes of avoiding responsibility for his disgusting film (which will remain unnamed), and portrayed himself as an “Israeli Jew”, implying Jews were behind the making of the film. All not true! Nakoula was no Jew but a member of the Egyptian Coptic Church. His wife’s Coptic Xtian relatives in Egypt funded this disreputable film.

What of the film itself? As the ABC Ross report notes, the actors-actresses said they were duped and had been told they were to appear in a flick called ‘Desert Warrior’. The scripts given them also were headed by this false title. Meanwhile, the names of the characters in the script were all fake, i.e. they were not the same as what "Bacile" would insert after production. (According to one actress interviewed, the names - of the actually intended characters, were dubbed in, post-production. Can anyone say FRAUD?)

For example in the actors' script the Prophet Mohammed was called “George”. Actress Cindy Garcia , interviewed by Ross, who made script-based (fictional) child molestation accusations against “George” (as she pointed out to Brian Ross) had no remote idea the references were to be later altered. For example, she wasn't aware that whenever she addressed the character "George" in her lines, the name would subsequently be changed (dubbed) to "Mohammed'. In other words, all the actors were lied to by this dirt bag Nakoula, who some rightists now wish to defend – even as he’s caused infernal havoc and bloodshed across the already unstable Middle East. And worse, as they seek to blame Obama for what this effing turd incited!

Let's get this straight once and for all: Any movie made under "bait and switch" false pretenses, to the extent the partaking actors are lied to concerning the film content, characters, is NO work of cinematic art but a TERRORIST act - especially when it incepts the violent reactions it did!"


In the wake of that, within weeks, the idiot media (most of them) hyped the Al Qaeda connection as assorted Repukes - especially Mittster Romney- screamed and pounded for justice. A question on possible 9/11  Benghazi connections to Al Qaeda was actually asked during the 2nd Presidential debate by Candy Crowley.) Almost every Repuke and lax media nabob - to a man -asserted that saying the video was responsible amounted to foolishness. But I never bought this folderol, nor did I post any blog retractions.

Now, thanks to a New York Times investigation and story ('Deadly Mix In Benghazi, False Allies, Rude Video', December 29) we now know the video WAS responsible, and incited anti-American rage but it wasn't Al Qaeda involved. Rather, it was one of the militias with which the U.S. had made common cause to oust Libyan dictator Muammar el-Qaddafi.  In retrospect, this also shows the wisdom of the U.S. not compounding previous errors by making an alliance with the Syrian rebels to take down Assad, see e.g.  http://brane-space.blogspot.com/2013/09/if-youre-agaist-radical-jihadists-you.html

As the Times piece states:

"Months of investigation centered on extensive  interviews with Libyans in Benghazi who had direct knowledge of the attack there and its context, turned up no evidence that Al Qaeda or other international terrorist groups had any role in the assault.

The attack was led, instead, by fighters who had benefitted directly from NATO's extensive air power and logistics support during the uprising against Colonel Qaddafi. And contrary to claims by some members of Congress, it was fueled in part by anger at an American -made video denigrating Islam."

The piece went on to delve into the basis in much more detail while also noting the (usually) garrulous Issa "had no comment" and that the incident "shows the risks of expecting American aid in a time of desperation to buy durable loyalty and the difficulty of discerning friends from allies in convenience in a culture shaped by decades of anti-American sentiment."

This provides the cautionary lesson for the U.S. not to meddle in Middle East affairs or states - whether by indirect interjection (via NATO air attacks and supplying rebels, as in Libya) or direct, as was contemplated months ago when the thought of using Syrian rebels to attack Hafez Assad was bruited in tandem with a cruise missile assault.  It also provides another domestic political lesson, of ignoring political grandstanding by known demagogues such as Darryl Issa, Peter King (R, NY), Lindsey Graham, and their assorted clones.

Will we learn from this? Only time will tell.

Meanwhile, the fathead fool and dickhead Peter King (R- NY) has flipped out at the NY Times editorial board calling them "apologists for terrorists"- for calling for clemency for Snowden. See,

http://www.salon.com/2014/01/02/gops_peter_king_flips_out_on_the_new_york_times/

This asshole still claims Snowden is a “traitor” -  despite the fact Ed has done more to protect this nation's honor and principles than the fat bag of blowhard gas has done in all his years sitting in congress.  The real traitors are pigs like King, and we need to call them out and say so!

Rachel Maddow's Theory on the Repuke Political Gamesmanship with Susan Rice is Correct!

There is no gainsaying the fact that Rachel Maddow is one of the most brilliant articulators in all of television. Her intellect stands like a shining beacon as brilliant as a thousand suns compared to all the blow-dried wannabes on the Right, and other pretenders (like Nora O'Donnell) in the mainstream Corporate Wurlitzer. You see, Rachel not only articulates but provides marvelous insight as she does so. Truly, I cannot understand how anyone who adopts the monicker "liberal" isn't watching her night after night.

Two nights ago, Rachel put forward what I believe is the only credible theory concerning the Republicans' continued Benghazi-based witch hunt of Susan Rice. Rice, a Rhodes Scholar, is possibly a nominee for Hillary Clinton's position at State, which is exactly why the Repubs are grand standing and carrying on as if she's really CONDI Rice - one of the inveterate liars that got us into the Iraq mess.

As Rachel asked: What can explain this fixation, which borders on obsessive compulsive disorder, or at least unchecked paranoia? What can explain people like John McCain and Lindsay Graham harassing Ms. Susan Rice when they easily gave Condi a pass for her own appointment at State - for the Bush Jr. first term? What can explain their continued attitude of condescension ("She can't be very bright!" - John McCain) and hostility? Especially when Rice was not even in the State Dept. when the Benghazi attack unfolded but the U.S. Ambassador to the UN. All Rice did was appear briefly on a Sunday morning talk show - not even before any formal court, or after swearing in, and you'd think she was the next thing to Bin Ladin's wife the way Graham, McCain, Bob Corker (TN) and now even Susan Collins (supposedly the most level headed) are carrying on!

Rachel's theory is simple and brilliant: The Reeps are carrying on as if all their sacred cows were gored at once because they are using political theater - under the ruse of the Benghazi incident (which has already been explained to them repeatedly) - as a means to force Obama to appoint John Kerry instead, thereby forcing a special election for his Massachusetts Senate seat. They are betting that their one time Tea Pot hero, Scott Brown, will be the benefactor and thereby return to the Senate! (Some deluded Dems actually don't believe this will be a 'biggie', but they are fooling themselves!)

At first glance, the linear plodding brain has problems, as it does with conspiracies, because it's unable to think at two different levels at once. In addition, the plodding brain can't see that the Repukes are all about exploiting political crises to further their political ends, agendas. "Aw, they'd never make such a fuss just to get an extra Senate seat!" Oh yes they would!  They are just as petty, craven and cynical as they've always been, and they'd stoop to that and even lower! Make no mistake!

Otherwise, why the fuck keep harassing Susan Rice, even after she gave these asswipes an hour of her time, accompanied by the Assistant CIA Director? As I already observed, the intelligence community (including CIA, NRA and NSA) would never have divulged what they REALLY believed  to have transpired at Benghazi in talking points to a UN Ambassador. Thus, the intelligence community would have massaged the actual facts so that too much was not given away...especially to bloodthirsty witch hunters - who as it was, on account of their obsession, had already exposed details of U.S. Embassy security operations!

But will the Reeps acknowledge this? NO! Because to do so means they can't keep their anti-Susan Rice appointment bandwagon (circus?) going!

This is all the more reason why Obama and the Dems must dig in on this and not relent! Obama needs to forthwith formally appoint the well-qualified Ms. Rice and let the chips fall where they may! Most especially, the chips will show a retinue of white Reepos harassing and impugning the character of an intelligent black woman. It will show other minorities that in no way are these Reepos changelings, even after an election in which the minority vote was the deciding factor.

Obama lose "political capital"? Fuck no! The Reepos will for the next election, and the next, and the next....

Footnote (11/30):

Major kudos to Rachel again, for last night's segment in which she showed clips of ALL the Susan Rice opponents campaigning openly and vigorously for Scottie Brown! The clips included: Kelly Ayotte (R-NH), loudly proclaiming Brown as her "ally", Susan Collins (R-ME) yucking it up with Brown at her side at a rally and John McCain loudly proclaiming  "THIS is the man I want in the Senate more than anyone else!"

BUSTED!

Uh, in respect to Rachel's theory, can we now say CASE CLOSED!

Kelly Ayotte, questioned  yesterday about Rachel's theory by Andrea Franklin, dismissed it as "absurd". Maybe, lady, YOU are the one absurd as you take the rest of us for simpletons!

Impeachment: The Worst Mistake the GOP Could Ever Make

Condi Rice: Wasn’t held to account, nor was Bush Jr. impeached, when it was discovered there were no WMD in Iraq and she had “misrepresented” Saddam’s link to al Qaeda. Susan Rice, therefore, is even less to blame given she wasn’t even at State during the Benghazi incident but the UN Ambassador, merely relaying the info she had at the time. Reeps need to lay off Susan and Obama, and drop their feverish impeachment bullshit.

As "the Benghazi brain fever" seems to have infected the Beltway and particularly found a life of its own in the Reeper -led House (aided and abetted by an always distracted corporate media hungry for conflicts), the I-word has indeed come up, as Ed Schulz pointed out last night. A group calling itself  'The Conservative Majority' is actually robo-calling reep imps...errrr...voters across the land (those not taken up by secession) and asking them to harass their GOOpr reps into initiating impeachment proceedings for "high crimes and misdemeanors"  against newly re-elected Barack Obama, starting after his inauguration.

Well, as Ed said, if you can't beat Obama fairly in the election, use dirty tricks and impeachment to try to retroactively repeal the will of the voters, like they tried to do with Bill Clinton.

But this time, the Reepos are making a capital, grade A mistake. Bear in mind this is the same President-elect that tens of millions of Latinos chose, as well as Asian -Americans (as Chris Hayes pointed out on his 'UP' program two weeks ago) as well as young women and African-Americans. These are the same demographics the GOP would LIKE to grab, but which even their most solid supporters have admitted they won't unless they alter their approach. (Former MS governor Hayley Barber yesterday actually suggested the Gooprs submit to a "proctology exam". Hey, Hayley! I don't think any such exam could go 'deep enough' to remove all the backed up shit in Goopr-land!)

Now just days ago we beheld all these constituencies thoroughly dissed by 'Sore Loser in Chief' Mitt Romney when he blamed his defeat to Barack on the federal government "gifts" doled out to young women (contraceptives), young people overall (forgiven interest on college debt), Latinos (allowing young people 18 and under to remain in the U.S., and go on track for citizenship) and African-Americans (provisions of 'Obamacare' so they are not denied health insurance because of pre-existing conditions).

Romney was evidently too dumb to grasp (as many complaining Reepos, e.g. Bobby Jindal,  are in response to his brain fart) that when you dismiss all your potential voters as "takers" you are essentially showing them you have zero respect for them, period. So why the hell would they vote for your sorry lot in the next election cycle?  They'd have to be stupid to even think of wasting a vote on the GOP brand!

Now, with insane Reepos fomenting impeachment, these Teepee Reepo idiots are going one howler further, by alienating the Obama constituencies not only as "takers" but de-legitimizing their choice overall!  How much more will these frothing freaks pile it on? Don't they know when to quit? Don't they know that merely disabling the Obama administration by impeachment proceedings will forever put the GOP in the sights of the Obama constituencies forever?  As consummate sore losers who can't get along, if nothing else? Even if they don't succeed in impeaching Barack, the GOP pursuers will make themselves totally foul to all the Obama constituencies. They will treat the GOP forever as lepers, or harboring some kind of transmittable brain parasites!  Those constituencies will also grasp that any such impeachment is merely a cover for removal of a President they couldn't beat outright in a fair election.

And what exactly is the putative basis for these  "high crimes and misdemeanors"? Evidently it's all about Benghazi and who knew what when. Even former Bushie Condoleeza Rice is getting into the act, commenting on the situation and Susan Rice. This is nothing short of incredible given that Condi was at the very center of the 'Saddam has WMD" and "Saddam is linked to al Qaeda" lies. Which were subsequently found to be all hogwash. Yet was Condi pulled up by her thumbs, as the GOOPS are doing with Susan Rice (who didn't even hold Condi's equivalent post, but rather was UN Ambassador.) Was Condi's boss Bush Dumbya pulled up and over for impeachment proceedings, for lying to Condi, or telling her to sow misinformation on Saddam? No, how could he be, when the REEPs controllled the House which would have been charged with bringing such proceedings!

Rice has apparently chimed in on several fronts, undoubtedly seeking to provide fodder for the investigative morons in the House. A segment of transcript of her remarks reads as follows:

“When you have the ambassador walking off to talk to the Turkish [consul general] in the courtyard on 9/11– something doesn’t seem quite right to me about the level of security preparations at the consulate.

“When you hear Secretary Clinton talk about an Accountability Review Board, that’s what they will look at. It is headed by five retired officers…I think they’ll do a good job, but we need to know, and those decisions– it’s not clear where they were made in the State Department…The regional security officer is the head diplomatic security officer in the consulate. This one had come back in July, he had reportedly asked that some additional security be kept on the ground, so something didn’t get right in terms of the decisions about security on the ground prior to the attack.”

  Of course, all of this is pure speculation, since Condi - not being in any formal loop anymore, has nothing whatever to go by.  It's also incredible she'd read anything sinister into a UN Ambassador talking to the Turkish General Consul. So what? Do you have a worthwhile conspiracy theory? If so, let's hear it.   As far as her babble about the "decisions concerning security" - obviously questioning them, maybe she needs to ask the Reep House why they cut $300 m  for Embassy funding and security across the globe, including in Barbados.

The GOP House budget cuts, however, forced all embassies to cut back, and security is one of the recurring expenses. Don't ask for whom the cuts toll, they toll for thee!  

Condi rambles on:  

"The second big issue is what happened during that eight or nine hours.  And there I think the proper place to understand that has to be the congressional intelligence committees, in Senate and Congress.  There is a lot that has to be understood about what is the role of the CIA was in all of this.  "  

At least here she displays some ballast and sense, although I personally would have preferred a congressional intel committee not headed by a Reepo witch hunter. I am sure Petraeus will be a 'good soldier' and do his duty, even if no longer in any official capacity. Its the Reepo wolves with whom we must concern ourselves and how they will use anything as ammo against our Prez!  

Finally, Condi says: 

 "And the third thing is, okay, so the administration kept shifting its story.  One day it was apparently terror…Susan Rice says it was the video.."  

But this "shifting the story" is the media-REEP byline, and bear in mind they all exhibit the attention span of gnats. 'Shfiting of story' is more likely due to shifting, rapidly paced events happening almost in concert. In logic we refer to a 'disjunctive plurality of causes". In other words, multiple causes at almost the same time as opposed to a linear one-cause to one effect, more agreeable to the simpleton brain.   For example, most genuine conspiracies hitherto exposed (e.g. BCCI, JFK assassination, Iran-Contra) have invariably been molded from a 'disjunctive plurality of causes'. Constructed more as a kind of parallel architecture - or unfolding of parallel and simultaneous operations. This is why most are so difficult to unravel, because they're approached by people -media seeking linear, one cause- to- one effect  connections.  

This Benghazi thing will continue to play out, but the Reeps are well advised not to jump to conclusions, or try to use the impeachment gambit to grab the validity they whiffed on in the recent election.  

Obama Must Not Make Nice with This Rat-Faced Cheeseater!

After Obama's press conference today, I am more than ever convinced he must adopt a warrior mentality to go to combat with the 'pukes. Nicey, bipartisan ain't gonna cut it. After McCain and Lindsey Graham spit on the potential nomination of Susan Rice at State, he needs to admit these bastards aren't worth dog shit - and as far as making any "deals" - grand bargains or other, fuck 'em!

The latest incident which shows these ungrateful turds for what they are is Mitt Romney, aka Willard 'The Ratface' Mitt', attributing his election loss to “gifts” President Barack Obama gave to important constituencies like young and African American voters. This is what The Los Angeles Times   reported

According to The Times:

"Obama, Romney argued, had been “very generous” to blacks, Hispanics and young voters. He cited as motivating factors to young voters the administration’s plan for partial forgiveness of college loan interest and the extension of health coverage for students on their parents’ insurance plans well into their 20s. Free contraception coverage under Obama’s healthcare plan, he added, gave an extra incentive to college-aged women to back the president."


This is an extension of the insidious load of rot Bill O'Reilly has been recycling about Obama voters just wanting 'stuff". This was in conjunction with a whacko rant about the need to go back to "Traditional America". You know the one, where white business men assholes ruled the roost and everyone danced to their tune, and where white bigots held sway.. O'Reilly made a list of current bitches about Obama voters, including - get this: they "don't go to church every Sunday". Hey, fuck you, O'Really - we don't need your dumb shit churches or preachy, hypocritical religions to inform us about reality. We KNOW reality!

Obama needs to stop placating these imps, including via calls to meet with Mitt Romney to discuss anything. The only useful discussion with the Mittster, after he ungraciously lost, would be the best way to deliver a high colonic - through the fucker's mouth or his arse. Other than that, Obama needs to make no more appeals, directly or indirectly.   As it is, the Left base has its eye on Obama's every move, and is still distrustful they won't eventually be screwed by a Grand "Bargain" that is weighted in terms of 3:1 cuts to Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid, as opposed to making the high -end wealthy pay 3: 1 in revenues, over spending cuts. To see more about what I'm referring to, go to:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/11/11/fiscal-cliff-talks-medicare-social-security_n_2113259.html  

Any bland appeals to sit down with the rat-faced Mittster makes Lefties' skin crawl, especially after this latest incident. Besides, it detracts from the warrior mentality Obama will need if he is truly to fight for the middle class against the deficit turds trying to exploit the "fiscal cliff" to swipe our hard-earned benefits!

Drop the nice guy bit, Mr. Prez. We want to see you come out continuously like a Rotweiller - evoking the way you handled the question on how Fuckface John McCain and asshole Lindsey Graham treated Susan Rice today. THAT is the guy we want to see 24/7!