Sunday, October 14, 2012

The Invisible Secretary of State

This might sound like a broken record (for those old enough to remember records) but the Libya fiasco just gets worse and worse. There are so many aspects to this disaster that it is hard to cover them all. The blogosphere, and even some corners of the MSM, are covering many, some of which this little blog anticipated from the start, and I don't want to repeat much of what others or I have written. Let me focus on one aspect that I am not seeing covered well: Hillary Clinton.

I have written before about the Secretary and her general vacuousness (here, for example) and don't want to go over all that again. Please scroll through the archives and you will find them replete with my views of the Secretary and the State Department's "Cult of the Secretary." I want to focus on something more narrow. Let's discuss two major foreign policy fiascoes that have occurred on her watch, Fast and Furious (F&F) and the Benghazi massacre, and ask one simple question: Have you noticed that when we have major crises, Hillary Clinton disappears?

F&F is the scandal that the mainstream media want to ignore at all costs. It also is one, frankly, which the Republicans have not done a good job of explaining to the American people. Again, I have written a great deal about F&F, so let's just summarize it as follows: the administration wanted to crack down on legal gun ownership in the US. To do that, and justify efforts at international gun control treaties, politically inclined bureaucrats in DOJ and ATF seized on the idea of proving the unproven liberal meme that "drugs flow north and guns flow south." They would organize a gun smuggling ring to supply weapons to the Mexican drug cartels to "prove" that the cartels arm themselves at US gun shows and stores. And that is what they did. They supplied thousands of weapons to some of the most vicious and well-organized criminals on the planet who subsequently used them to commit hundreds of murders, including those of women and children and of at least two US federal agents. Obama's DOJ, in essence, ran a covert war against the people and government of Mexico; hundreds of Mexicans were brutally killed thanks to the deliberate policy of President Obama's Attorney General and his ideological obsession with killing off the second amendment.

At State, we received marching orders to go forth and put out the line that guns in Mexico's drug violence came from the US. While visiting Mexico, President Obama stated,
“This war is being waged with guns purchased not here, but in the United States. More than 90 percent of the guns recovered in Mexico come from the United States, many from gun shops that line our shared border.”
That, of course, is a lie at odds with reality.

When the scandal finally broke, despite the efforts of the MSM/Democrats to bury it, I was amazed at how no questions came Hillary Clinton's way. The Congressional investigation, which the White House sought to stifle, has focused almost exclusively on DOJ and ATF. Nobody has asked Clinton if she knew of F&F. Nobody has asked for her reaction to the DOJ conducting an undeclared war on our neighbor. Nobody has asked if she raised this issue with Holder and the President. Nobody has asked what she said to the Mexicans. Nobody has asked what this meant for the administration's claims about US gun stores serving as armories for the cartels, and its efforts to destroy the trade in small arms. Nobody has asked, and she has not volunteered. She has made herself invisible on the topic and the press has helped her.

We have a repeat of this vanishing act in the Benghazi disaster. We have a US ambassador and three of his staff murdered by Islamic terrorists, and the Secretary is almost invisible. She delivered a silly eulogy in which she blamed the deaths on a 14-video, but that was about it. A few days ago she momentarily popped up to give a pap-laden speech which showed that she like the French Bourbons, in words ascribed to Talleyrand,"had learned nothing and forgotten nothing." Our Secretary of State said, 
"Last month's violence revealed strains of extremism that threaten these nations, as well as the broader region and the United States . . . On the other hand, we've seen actions that would have been hard to imagine just a few years ago: Democratically-elected leaders and free people in Arab countries standing up for a peaceful, pluralist future. . . . It is too soon to say how these transitions will play out, but what's not in doubt is that America has a big stake in the outcome."
She cannot give up the liberal delusion that she has helped spread democracy in the Middle East, and that the people there are "standing up for a peaceful, pluralist future." It seems that our dead are, in Obama's words, just little "bumps in the road" to this bright happy future. Future bumps will consist of women, gays, Christians, and Jews. But to make an omelet, well, you have to break a few eggs, right?

On Benghazi, why is the media not pressing her on what happened to people who worked directly for her? To people carrying out the foreign policy "designed" by her and the President? Just prior to Congressman Issa's October 11 hearing, senior State Department officials provided a "background" briefing to selected journalists. In this briefing, they laid out a time line and gave information that clearly showed that the misadministration's account of the Benghazi attack, including the statements by Ambassador Rice, were absurd lies wrong. That briefing also reveals, by the way, that the career service will not take lying down Obama/Biden's efforts to blame the disaster on them. There will be more to come on that score, I assure you.

Something else even more important comes through in the background briefing. Nowhere do we see mention of Hillary Clinton. Was she in the loop? Did anybody at any time inform the Secretary of an attack underway? Hard to believe they would not. If they did, what was her reaction? Did she contact anybody? The National Security Advisor? The President of the USA? The President of Libya? I have been in the ultra-high-tech Diplomatic Security Op Center in Virginia. It is a marvel of modern technology with some amazing capabilities. This center apparently was monitoring the six-hour attack in real time. The DS center ties in with similar centers at Main State, CIA, Pentagon, the White House, and elsewhere. What were they saying to each other? Nobody at the NSC, the Pentagon, or the White House contacted the President? If they did, what he do? Did he call Clinton or Panetta? Are the press reports that he went to bed accurate? If so, did the Secretary of State try to wake him and ask for a rescue effort to be launched? Did any instructions go forth to any of the combatant commands? No "actionable intelligence" existed to act upon even once the attack began? There are reports, after all, that somebody launched a slow-flying drone that managed to get there in time to cover at least some of the attack. Nothing else could have been launched?

In sum, what did Secretary Clinton know and when? What did she do while the attack was underway to try to save the people in her charge? Nobody asks for an explanation; she does not offer one.

It seems, my friends, that to accompany the empty chair in the White House we have an empty pantsuit at State.


Secretary Clinton's official portrait.

I would hope to see at the next debate that, on behalf of the American people, Governor Romney breaks out with some of the lyrics from the Great Philosopher Tina Turner,

Cause I don't have no use
For what you loosely call the truth . . .

You better be good to me
That's how it's gotta be now
Cause I don't have the time
For your over loaded lines
You better be good to me

And I really don't see 
why it's so hard to be good to me
And I don't understand what's your plan
that you can't be good to me
What I can't feel, I surely cannot see,
why can't you be good to me
And if it's not real I do not wish to see, 
why can't you be good to me.

23 comments:

  1. I bet she's wishing she hadn't said it's the videos' fault. Because of that she's stuck big time. Stay with Obama and throw State and/or CIA under the bus or break with Obama that's her only choice. In any event, I find it hard to believe she can stay as Secretary. As for that I don't think there is now any appointed place in government for her.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Here's a theory. It might be way off base, but I'm gonna throw it out for what it's worth.

    The National Command Authority (including the President SecDef, SecState and DNI at least, and probably a number of subordinate commands) were aware of the attack on our embassy in real time. (This is not theory -- it has been substantiated.) Someone realized the attack was an act of war and urged response, but Obama (thinking "war with a Muslim nation this close to the election would not be good") nixed that. Probably saying "we need more information." The rest of the NCA nodded, a little angry but recognizing that Obama is not noted for leading from in front. Then they needed a cover story that did not recognize our sovereign territory had been attacked, and someone pointed out the handy coincidence of the riots in Egypt. That's when it was decided to play that story up, to buy an advertisement in Pakistan, and to send Susan Rice out to the Sunday talk shows.

    I know, its crazy. But possible. F

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Zane here, since I have to post as anonymous.

      Even the Cairo "It was all about the hateful youtube video" meme has fallen apart.

      On 9-11, the very day of the Cairo protests, which the Administration told the nation was due to a film no one has ever seen, Nic Robertson, of CNN, was in Cairo and interview Ayman al Zawahri's brother who was one of the lead organizers of the Cairo protest. You can watch it here:

      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tPszLCEyu-I

      Please watch, and take note of what is missing from the reasons given for the protest. No mention of the film. The protest, designed to be on 9-11, a day that holds great importance for jihadists, was about getting the Blind Sheikh released. End of story. CNN, to my knowledge, never ran the Nic Robertson interview. We all know why. It would dispute the fairy tales being put out by the White House.

      As to the missing Secretary of State: She has, in her few appearances, been carrying water for the administration. And with that action, has dashed every hope she might have had for 2016 (and make no mistake, Hillary still has presidential aspirations). That means she has to stay above the fray, both with Fast and Furious and BenghaziGate. But this time it won't work, because the interview that David Axelrod gave to Chris Wallace yesterday showed that the Oval Office clearly has intentions of throwing Hillary under the Obama bus, as it looks for a scapegoat, any scapegoat, to take the heat off the Community Organizer in Chief.

      But where is General Petreaus? A number of times Obama's minions have tried to blame Benghazi on "poor intel." Is Patreaus going to let his spooks take the blame for the failure that was clearly on the part of this Administration? During the Congressional hearing last week, where was the representation from CIA, telling what CIA knew, and when?

      I have great respect for our career people at both State and the CIA. I do not, for one minute, think they underestimated the situation on the ground in Libya. I think the decision to put Chris Stevens, and other American foreign service personnel, in harm's way was made very far up the top of the food chain. Why? Did it have anything to do with the article that ran in the UK Independent that said Obama was trying to get the Sauds to furnish weapons to the Libyan rebels and the Sauds were balking on that plan? Did Obama use a clandestine operation to furnish weapons to Libyan rebels and it was learned that those rebels were really AQ? How would it look to have the nation, this close to an election, learn that WE, the U.S., were the ones to supply weapons that wound up killing Ambassador Stevens?

      There are more sinister senarios floating out on the web. One such senario is that Obama went to bed, not knowing the whereabouts of Ambassador Stevens, because he knew there was going to be an attack and the goal was to kidnap Stevens. That senario also includes a swap of Stevens for the Blind Sheikh. Obama is totally supportive of Egypt, and Morsi demanded the release of the Blind Sheikh in his acceptance speech. Just saying.

      This event must be kept on the front page. We must get to the bottom of it and the American people have a right to know WHY Ambassador Stevens was murdered and WHY he was in Benghazi, one of the biggest hot-spots in the ME, on 9-11. All we are getting now is finger pointing over the attack, not the real truth behind the story.

      Delete
  3. I was thinking something more along the line of the "Happy Nappers" commercial.

    We are happy,
    happy nappers.

    I doubt the happy Napper in chief even realized it was a problem, until it was a problem for him personally. When someone surrounds themselves with yes men and closes themselves off from outside input, they loose touch with reality.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. This.

      He thought if he ignored it, it would go away. So he went to bed.

      I suspect he did so believing his underlings would have a cover story for him by morning. And voila! They did. But the one they concocted was insupportable. This speaks so loudly to the level of incompetence in this administration that even the presstitutes cannot ignore it..

      How delicious to watch that cover story unraveling. Perhaps as it does we will turn renewed attention to the lies of Fast and Furious.

      creeper

      Delete
  4. Code Macavity

    TS Elliots poem sums it up for both Obama and the the Clintster I think ... Substitute the appropriate name when reading

    Phil B

    Macavity's a Mystery Cat: he's called the Hidden Paw--
    For he's the master criminal who can defy the Law.
    He's the bafflement of Scotland Yard, the Flying Squad's despair:
    For when they reach the scene of crime--Macavity's not there!

    Macavity, Macavity, there's no on like Macavity,
    He's broken every human law, he breaks the law of gravity.
    His powers of levitation would make a fakir stare,
    And when you reach the scene of crime--Macavity's not there!
    You may seek him in the basement, you may look up in the air--
    But I tell you once and once again, Macavity's not there!

    Macavity's a ginger cat, he's very tall and thin;
    You would know him if you saw him, for his eyes are sunken in.
    His brow is deeply lined with thought, his head is highly doomed;
    His coat is dusty from neglect, his whiskers are uncombed.
    He sways his head from side to side, with movements like a snake;
    And when you think he's half asleep, he's always wide awake.

    Macavity, Macavity, there's no one like Macavity,
    For he's a fiend in feline shape, a monster of depravity.
    You may meet him in a by-street, you may see him in the square--
    But when a crime's discovered, then Macavity's not there!

    He's outwardly respectable. (They say he cheats at cards.)
    And his footprints are not found in any file of Scotland Yard's.
    And when the larder's looted, or the jewel-case is rifled,
    Or when the milk is missing, or another Peke's been stifled,
    Or the greenhouse glass is broken, and the trellis past repair--
    Ay, there's the wonder of the thing! Macavity's not there!

    And when the Foreign Office finds a Treaty's gone astray,
    Or the Admiralty lose some plans and drawings by the way,
    There may be a scap of paper in the hall or on the stair--
    But it's useless of investigate--Macavity's not there!
    And when the loss has been disclosed, the Secret Service say:
    "It must have been Macavity!"--but he's a mile away.
    You'll be sure to find him resting, or a-licking of his thumbs,
    Or engaged in doing complicated long division sums.

    Macavity, Macavity, there's no one like Macacity,
    There never was a Cat of such deceitfulness and suavity.
    He always has an alibit, or one or two to spare:
    And whatever time the deed took place--MACAVITY WASN'T THERE!
    And they say that all the Cats whose wicked deeds are widely known
    (I might mention Mungojerrie, I might mention Griddlebone)
    Are nothing more than agents for the Cat who all the time
    Just controls their operations: the Napoleon of Crime!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Delightful. And utterly apropos. Thank you.

      creeper

      Delete
  5. I had a rather odd experience at a reception on the Yale University campus this weekend. I had the suspicion that I was watching the launch of a trial balloon. The person doing the launching was a tweed-wearing politico with strong connections to State, and he was in full, Clintonian sycophancy. Yale's President is stepping down at the end of the year, and the university is conducting an active search for his successor. The buzz at the reception was that Hillary Clinton is among the leading candidates for the role. The food was outstanding, but the rapturous glee with which her possible candidacy was being greeted by the assembled alums and faculty was giving me more than a mild case of nausea. My polite suggestion that perhaps Ms. Clinton lacks the unambiguously successful executive track record one normally expects a leading candidate for such a role to have was greeted with the enthusiasm typically reserved for a loud, wet fart.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. PS. I also note that Eisenhower served as President of Columbia University before running for President of the United States. Not that 2016 is on anyone's mind in the Clinton household, of course...

      Delete
    2. Barack Obama is certainly giving 2016 the Evil Eye. Strange how this Libya fiasco has the potential of knocking Billary out of the running for 2016. Has anyone determined yet who specifically ordered Ambassador Stevens to Benghazi on 9/11? He certainly makes a nice sacrificial lamb at an opportune time - only 100 days before President Obama is asked to leave the White House. This whole scenario stinks like week old fish.

      Delete
  6. After Axeltard mentioned State about 8 times with Chris Wallace today, looks like the HRC bus has left the depot. Bill to the rescue?

    ReplyDelete
  7. The thing that worries me most about Hillary Clinton was her statement a couple of days after the Benghazi attack. When she got around to mentioning the First Amendment--after the obligatory condemnation of the rightly obscure Nakoula Nakoula film--she sounded both tinny and as if she were speaking a second language which she had not mastered very well. Such a performance by an American lawyer employed by a supposed scholar of Constitutional law (BTW, does anyone know of anything peer-reviewed that Obama has written?) is inexcusable.

    ReplyDelete
  8. It was 3AM.
    The Phone in the White House was ringing.
    The POTUS was on his way to Vegas.
    The Ambassador got voicemail.

    Someone should do a commercial on this.

    ReplyDelete
  9. Hillary has spoken. She said that the Amb. Rice's information came from the White House and not the State Department.


    "The State Department has said that it never believed the September 11th attack on the U.S. consulate in Benghazi was the result of a protest over an anti-Islam movie - directly contracting the rest of the Obama administration."

    In the war between the Obamas and the Clintons, my money is on the Clintons.

    Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2215431/Death-U-S-ambassador-Chris-Stevens-revealed-AK-47s-grenade-attacks-smoke-filled-safe-room.html#ixzz29Nt6WunK

    ReplyDelete
  10. Regarding the movie meme, is it possible that those whom barry has delegated the dirty work to have had it with the "misadministration" and decided to come up with the most indefensible excuse possible all the time planning to sit back with a big bag of popcorn and watch the "misadministration" come apart at the seams right before the election?

    ReplyDelete
  11. ...and what was said to the Deputy Secretary of State for Management about SST and MSD leaving when he visited Libya in March?

    ReplyDelete
  12. I suspect that hat would look way better on QEII, the queen, not the boat.

    ReplyDelete
  13. DiploMad, are you a prophet or the son of a prophet? I saw on Drudge tonight that someone just climbed under the buss. Yup, Hillary... LOL

    ReplyDelete
  14. Well now, Hillary now says "She's responsible for Ben Ghazi", but it's really the fault of someone working for her. I wonder who's being auditioned for a fall. Furious wouldn't begin to describe me if I was career at State. The wolves a getting closer.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Just posted something on this. Her statement is a joke.

      Delete
  15. Well, Hillary cant exactly excuse herself by telling the truth - that everyone deferred to Valery Jarrett...after all, the 3 week delay she imposed on Obama for the OBL hit worked then, and sending out their patsys like Cummmings on F&F, and the delay and Rice's talking points to work out for them this time.

    ReplyDelete