Democrats Fabricated The IRS Scandal To Take The Focus Off Benghazi

gregdavidson · May 25, 2013

I believe that the IRS scandal was cooked up by the Obama administration to take the focus off of Benghazi. Think about this for a second. Who blew the whistle? Obviously it was a DEMOCRAT who worked for the IRS. And the reason why she blew the whistle is because it never really happened. The IRS scandal is nothing more than an ingenious plan to take the focus off the Benghazi investigation. It's sort of like one army cornering another army. But just when the winning army is getting ready to take out their enemies, a decoy runs by and gets them running in the wrong direction. You can't shoot two rabbits at the same time. The Republicans either have to go for the fabricated IRS scandal or the Benghazi attacks. If you focus on both at the same time you're going to miss them both.

Ctrl · May 25, 2013

This Dbag is correct.

AKR · May 25, 2013

gregdavidson said: ↑

I believe that the IRS scandal was cooked up by the Obama administration to take the focus off of Benghazi. Think about this for a second. Who blew the whistle? Obviously it was a DEMOCRAT who worked for the IRS. And the reason why she blew the whistle is because it never really happened. The IRS scandal is nothing more than an ingenious plan to take the focus off the Benghazi investigation. It's sort of like one army cornering another army. But just when the winning army is getting ready to take out their enemies, a decoy runs by and gets them running in the wrong direction. You can't shoot two rabbits at the same time. The Republicans either have to go for the fabricated IRS scandal or the Benghazi attacks. If you focus on both at the same time you're going to miss them both.
Click to expand...

lol OH, the conspiracy theories people come up with.

Daggdag · May 25, 2013

Wait.........So the Democrats fabricated a scandle that made them look bad, in order to take peoples' minds off of something that made them look bad?

gregdavidson · May 25, 2013

Obviously Ctrl is the only person on this forum who gets it. You guys don't understand the power of psychology.

Logician0311 · May 26, 2013

gregdavidson said: ↑

Obviously Ctrl is the only person on this forum who gets it. You guys don't understand the power of psychology.
Click to expand...

Actually, the Benghazi issue is starting to make the GOP look ridiculous and very few people actually care about it any more... Why create a new issue that might actually gain traction?

I know conservatives are rightfully outraged over the profiling by the IRS..... Now back to those muslims...

Natty Bumpo · May 26, 2013

The fact that abuses at the IRS allegedly occurred under Bushie Commissioner Shulman and concentrated on the eligibility for TP groups seeking tax exempt status, coupled with rightist reports of a war between the TPs and fellow Bushie Karl "Turdblossom" Rove, does raise obvious questions that some, with their own disparate political agenda, are desperate to ignore.

That Rove and establishment Republickers were fed up with the TPs offing the usual suspects in primaries by promoting their unelectable loonies was obvious to everyone. If anything, Democrats welcomed the internal strife in the GOP's nominating process, and delighted in TP antics, perhaps even acknowledging their essential roll in electing a majoritarian Senate.

Of course, the partisan attempt to exploit the Benghazi tragedy presents its own problems. "Let's try to pin it on Hillary," may appear a promising way of swiftboating a very popular Secretary of State and potential 2016 presidential candidate, but the Party's Congressional hitmen came up against reality: It was essentially a CIA operation behind the guise of a diplomatic mission:

Officially, the U.S. presence was a diplomatic compound under the State Department's purview ...

"The diplomatic facility in Benghazi would be closed until further notice," then-State Department spokeswoman Victoria Nuland announced last October.

... But in practice - and this is what so few people have focused on - the larger U.S. presence was in a secret outpost operated by the CIA.

About 30 people were evacuated from Benghazi the morning after the deadly attack last September 11; more than 20 of them were CIA employees.

Clearly the larger mission in Benghazi was covert.

The CIA had two objectives in Libya: countering the terrorist threat that emerged as extremists poured into the unstable country, and helping to secure the flood of weapons after the fall of Moammar Gadhafi that could have easily been funneled to terrorists.

The State Department was the public face of the weapons collection program.

"One of the reasons that we and other government agencies were present in Benghazi is exactly that. We had a concerted effort to try to track down and find and recover as many MANPADS [man-portable air defense systems], and other very dangerous weapons as possible," former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton testified before Congress in January.

The CIA's role during and after the attacks at the diplomatic post and the CIA annex in Benghazi have so far escaped much scrutiny.

The focus has been on the failure of the State Department to heed growing signs of the militant threat in the city and ensure adequate security, and on the political debate over why the White House seemed to downplay what was a terrorist attack in the weeks before the presidential election.

But the public needs to know more about the agency's role, said Republican congressman Frank Wolf, of Virginia.

"There are questions that must be asked of the CIA and this must be done in a public way," said Wolf.

Sources at the State Department say this context explains why there was so much debate over those talking points. Essentially, they say, the State Department felt it was being blamed for bungling what it saw as largely a CIA operation in Benghazi.

Current and former U.S. government officials tell CNN that then-CIA director David Petraeus and others in the CIA initially assessed the attack to have been related to protests against an anti-Muslim video produced in the United States.

They say Petraeus may have been reluctant to conclude it was a planned attack because that would have been acknowledging an intelligence failure.

Internally at the CIA, sources tell CNN there was a big debate after the attacks to acknowledge that the two former Navy SEALs killed Tyrone Woods and Glen Doherty were CIA employees. At a 2010 attack in Khost, Afghanistan, when seven CIA officers were killed in the line of duty, the agency stepped forward and acknowledged their service and sacrifice. But in this instance - for reasons many in the Obama administration did not fully understand - it took the CIA awhile to "roll back their covers." Petraeus did not attend their funerals.

Wolf said he and his office are getting calls from CIA officials who want to talk and want to share more.

"If you're 50 years old and have two kids in college, you're not going to give your career up by coming in, so you also need subpoena power," said the Republican congressman. "Let people come forward, subpoena them to give them the protection so they can't be fired."

But is the secrecy surrounding the CIA's presence in Benghazi the reason for the administration's fumble after fumble when trying to explain what happened the night of the attack?

There were 12 versions of talking points before a watered down product was agreed upon suggesting an inter-government squabble over words that would ultimately lay the blame on one agency, or the other.

Perhaps the State Department did not want to get in the line of fire for a CIA operation that they in many ways were just the front for, the CIA "wearing their jacket," as one current government official put it.

The CIA did have an informal arrangement to help the mission if needed, but it was not the primary security for the mission. The State Department had hired local guards for protection.

People at the CIA annex did respond to calls for help the night of the attack. But despite being only a mile away, it took the team 20 to 30 minutes to get there. Gathering the appropriate arms and other resources was necessary.

None of this diminishes questions about how the White House, just weeks before the presidential election, seemed to downplay that this was a terrorist attack. Or the State Department's initial refusal to acknowledge that it had not provided adequate security for its own officials there.

But the role of the CIA, its clear intelligence failure before the attack, and - as it continued to push the theory of the anti-Muslim video - after the attack, bears more scrutiny as well.

http://thelead.blogs.cnn.com/2013/05/15/analysis-cia-role-in-benghazi-underreported/
Click to expand...

Darryll Issa and his hapless pack would likely wallow in the mire of murky covert operations and the evocations of "National Security" if they actually tried dredging up the facts behind the Benghazi affair, and would be far more likely to slime Petraeus than Clinton. Since their discrediting the CIA chief would serve no partisan purpose, they may as well revert to the "birther" nuttiness that so many Americans find so amusing.

Log in or Sign up

Democrats Fabricated The IRS Scandal To Take The Focus Off Benghazi

gregdavidson New Member

Ctrl Well-Known Member Past Donor

AKR New Member

Daggdag Well-Known Member

gregdavidson New Member

Logician0311 Well-Known Member

Natty Bumpo Well-Known Member

Share This Page

Log in or Sign up

Democrats Fabricated The IRS Scandal To Take The Focus Off Benghazi

gregdavidson New Member

Ctrl Well-Known Member Past Donor

AKR New Member

Daggdag Well-Known Member

gregdavidson New Member

Logician0311 Well-Known Member

Natty Bumpo Well-Known Member

Share This Page

Useful Searches