‘Chickens Coming Home to Roost’

Much discussion was held on this site about the killing of four Americans, including an U.S. Ambassador, in the Benghazi Consulate on September 11, 2012. This was eight weeks prior to the Presidential election. Almost 2 years later, as a result of a private legal court case, just released emails from September 2012 along with previous testimony at Congressional hearings now show the Obama administration lied to and misled the American people (voters) intentionally. We know that Michael Morell, who testified under oath, and at the time was Deputy Director of the CIA, stated that he never brought up the video as a reason for the attack and thus it did not come from the CIA.

The exact words used by Ben Rhodes, White House Deputy Strategic Communications Adviser, in an email to numerous higher-ups in the White House, were:

“To underscore that these protests are rooted in an Internet video, and not a broader failure or policy.

Charles Krauthammer says it thusly:

There you have it, the Obama administration’s strategy on handling the death of 4 Americans abroad, amidst a contested re-election campaign, was to put personal politics above American policy.

And sadly, it worked. But slowly, ever so slowly, to quote President Obama’s pastor of 20 years, Rev. Jeremiah Wright, “the chickens are coming home to roost”.


  1. Confused says:

    Huh ?

  2. Randy in Richmond says:

    Confused comment is ‘huh’ ? Perfect.

  3. Confused says:

    All this proves is that the WH was trying to get in front of the message like any administration does.

  4. The Bystander says:

    It seems that they spun the story in exactly the same manner as every administration. Remember “weapons of mass destruction” as justification to invade Iraq?. The reason the public at large is not interested in Bengazi is that it’s not that shocking an episode. Do you know what we call four dead Americans in Milwaukee? A slow Saturday night.

  5. Randy in Richmond says:

    You are right Bystander. They ‘spun the story’ to help get a spinner re-elected.

    In Milwaukee, if the bad guys have surrounded a building in which the mayor is located, and are firing assorted weaponry into the building, and the authorities know of it early in the attack – do they do nothing and then blame it on some incidental diversion? If that’s what they do in Milwaukee, you may have a point.

  6. Randy in Richmond says:

    And one more time. Anyone wishing to impugn George Bush for his decision to enter Iraq over weapons of mass destruction (along with 37 other countries) also impugns the Senate Democrats listed here that voted for the resolution; as well as others below:

    Akaka (D-HI), Bingaman (D-NM), Boxer (D-CA), Byrd (D-WV), Conrad (D-ND), Corzine (D-NJ), Dayton (D-MN), Durbin (D-IL), Feingold (D-WI), Graham (D-FL), Inouye (D-HI), Kennedy (D-MA), Leahy (D-VT), Levin (D-MI), Mikulski (D-MD), Murray (D-WA), Reed (D-RI), Sarbanes (D-MD), Stabenow (D-MI), Wellstone (D-MN), and Wyden (D-OR).

    “[W]e urge you, after consulting with Congress, and consistent with the U.S. Constitution and laws, to take necessary actions (including, if appropriate, air and missile strikes on suspect Iraqi sites) to respond effectively to the threat posed by Iraq’s refusal to end its weapons of mass destruction programs.” — From a letter signed by Joe Lieberman, Dianne Feinstein, Barbara A. Milulski, Tom Daschle, & John Kerry among others on October 9, 1998

    “This December will mark three years since United Nations inspectors last visited Iraq. There is no doubt that since that time, Saddam Hussein has reinvigorated his weapons programs. Reports indicate that biological, chemical and nuclear programs continue apace and may be back to pre-Gulf War status. In addition, Saddam continues to refine delivery systems and is doubtless using the cover of a licit missile program to develop longer- range missiles that will threaten the United States and our allies.” — From a December 6, 2001 letter signed by Bob Graham, Joe Lieberman, Harold Ford, & Tom Lantos among others

    “Whereas Iraq has consistently breached its cease-fire agreement between Iraq and the United States, entered into on March 3, 1991, by failing to dismantle its weapons of mass destruction program, and refusing to permit monitoring and verification by United Nations inspections; Whereas Iraq has developed weapons of mass destruction, including chemical and biological capabilities, and has made positive progress toward developing nuclear weapons capabilities” — From a joint resolution submitted by Tom Harkin and Arlen Specter on July 18, 2002

    “Saddam’s goal … is to achieve the lifting of U.N. sanctions while retaining and enhancing Iraq’s weapons of mass destruction programs. We cannot, we must not and we will not let him succeed.” — Madeline Albright, 1998

    “(Saddam) will rebuild his arsenal of weapons of mass destruction and some day, some way, I am certain he will use that arsenal again, as he has 10 times since 1983″ — National Security Adviser Sandy Berger, Feb 18, 1998

    “Iraq made commitments after the Gulf War to completely dismantle all weapons of mass destruction, and unfortunately, Iraq has not lived up to its agreement.” — Barbara Boxer, November 8, 2002

    “The last UN weapons inspectors left Iraq in October of 1998. We are confident that Saddam Hussein retained some stockpiles of chemical and biological weapons, and that he has since embarked on a crash course to build up his chemical and biological warfare capability. Intelligence reports also indicate that he is seeking nuclear weapons, but has not yet achieved nuclear capability.” — Robert Byrd, October 2002

    “There’s no question that Saddam Hussein is a threat… Yes, he has chemical and biological weapons. He’s had those for a long time. But the United States right now is on a very much different defensive posture than we were before September 11th of 2001… He is, as far as we know, actively pursuing nuclear capabilities, though he doesn’t have nuclear warheads yet. If he were to acquire nuclear weapons, I think our friends in the region would face greatly increased risks as would we.” — Wesley Clark on September 26, 2002

    “What is at stake is how to answer the potential threat Iraq represents with the risk of proliferation of WMD. Baghdad’s regime did use such weapons in the past. Today, a number of evidences may lead to think that, over the past four years, in the absence of international inspectors, this country has continued armament programs.” — Jacques Chirac, October 16, 2002

    “The community of nations may see more and more of the very kind of threat Iraq poses now: a rogue state with weapons of mass destruction, ready to use them or provide them to terrorists. If we fail to respond today, Saddam and all those who would follow in his footsteps will be emboldened tomorrow.” — Bill Clinton in 1998

    “In the four years since the inspectors left, intelligence reports show that Saddam Hussein has worked to rebuild his chemical and biological weapons stock, his missile delivery capability, and his nuclear program. He has also given aid, comfort, and sanctuary to terrorists, including Al Qaeda members, though there is apparently no evidence of his involvement in the terrible events of September 11, 2001. It is clear, however, that if left unchecked, Saddam Hussein will continue to increase his capacity to wage biological and chemical warfare, and will keep trying to develop nuclear weapons. Should he succeed in that endeavor, he could alter the political and security landscape of the Middle East, which as we know all too well affects American security.” — Hillary Clinton, October 10, 2002

    “I am absolutely convinced that there are weapons…I saw evidence back in 1998 when we would see the inspectors being barred from gaining entry into a warehouse for three hours with trucks rolling up and then moving those trucks out.” — Clinton’s Secretary of Defense William Cohen in April of 2003

    “Iraq is not the only nation in the world to possess weapons of mass destruction, but it is the only nation with a leader who has used them against his own people.” — Tom Daschle in 1998

    “Saddam Hussein’s regime represents a grave threat to America and our allies, including our vital ally, Israel. For more than two decades, Saddam Hussein has sought weapons of mass destruction through every available means. We know that he has chemical and biological weapons. He has already used them against his neighbors and his own people, and is trying to build more. We know that he is doing everything he can to build nuclear weapons, and we know that each day he gets closer to achieving that goal.” — John Edwards, Oct 10, 2002

    “The debate over Iraq is not about politics. It is about national security. It should be clear that our national security requires Congress to send a clear message to Iraq and the world: America is united in its determination to eliminate forever the threat of Iraq’s weapons of mass destruction.” — John Edwards, Oct 10, 2002

    “I share the administration’s goals in dealing with Iraq and its weapons of mass destruction.” — Dick Gephardt in September of 2002

    “Iraq does pose a serious threat to the stability of the Persian Gulf and we should organize an international coalition to eliminate his access to weapons of mass destruction. Iraq’s search for weapons of mass destruction has proven impossible to completely deter and we should assume that it will continue for as long as Saddam is in power.” — Al Gore, 2002

    “We are in possession of what I think to be compelling evidence that Saddam Hussein has, and has had for a number of years, a developing capacity for the production and storage of weapons of mass destruction.” — Bob Graham, December 2002

    “Saddam Hussein is not the only deranged dictator who is willing to deprive his people in order to acquire weapons of mass destruction.” — Jim Jeffords, October 8, 2002

    “We have known for many years that Saddam Hussein is seeking and developing weapons of mass destruction.” — Ted Kennedy, September 27, 2002

    “There is no doubt that Saddam Hussein’s regime is a serious danger, that he is a tyrant, and that his pursuit of lethal weapons of mass destruction cannot be tolerated. He must be disarmed.” — Ted Kennedy, Sept 27, 2002

    “I will be voting to give the president of the United States the authority to use force – if necessary – to disarm Saddam Hussein because I believe that a deadly arsenal of weapons of mass destruction in his hands is a real and grave threat to our security.” — John F. Kerry, Oct 2002

    “The threat of Saddam Hussein with weapons of mass destruction is real, but as I said, it is not new. It has been with us since the end of that war, and particularly in the last 4 years we know after Operation Desert Fox failed to force him to reaccept them, that he has continued to build those weapons. He has had a free hand for 4 years to reconstitute these weapons, allowing the world, during the interval, to lose the focus we had on weapons of mass destruction and the issue of proliferation.” — John Kerry, October 9, 2002

    “(W)e need to disarm Saddam Hussein. He is a brutal, murderous dictator, leading an oppressive regime. We all know the litany of his offenses. He presents a particularly grievous threat because he is so consistently prone to miscalculation. …And now he is miscalculating America’s response to his continued deceit and his consistent grasp for weapons of mass destruction. That is why the world, through the United Nations Security Council, has spoken with one voice, demanding that Iraq disclose its weapons programs and disarm. So the threat of Saddam Hussein with weapons of mass destruction is real, but it is not new. It has been with us since the end of the Persian Gulf War.” — John Kerry, Jan 23, 2003

    “We begin with the common belief that Saddam Hussein is a tyrant and a threat to the peace and stability of the region. He has ignored the mandates of the United Nations and is building weapons of mass destruction and the means of delivering them.” — Carl Levin, Sept 19, 2002

    “Every day Saddam remains in power with chemical weapons, biological weapons, and the development of nuclear weapons is a day of danger for the United States.” — Joe Lieberman, August, 2002

    “Over the years, Iraq has worked to develop nuclear, chemical and biological weapons. During 1991 – 1994, despite Iraq’s denials, U.N. inspectors discovered and dismantled a large network of nuclear facilities that Iraq was using to develop nuclear weapons. Various reports indicate that Iraq is still actively pursuing nuclear weapons capability. There is no reason to think otherwise. Beyond nuclear weapons, Iraq has actively pursued biological and chemical weapons.U.N. inspectors have said that Iraq’s claims about biological weapons is neither credible nor verifiable. In 1986, Iraq used chemical weapons against Iran, and later, against its own Kurdish population. While weapons inspections have been successful in the past, there have been no inspections since the end of 1998. There can be no doubt that Iraq has continued to pursue its goal of obtaining weapons of mass destruction.” — Patty Murray, October 9, 2002

    “As a member of the House Intelligence Committee, I am keenly aware that the proliferation of chemical and biological weapons is an issue of grave importance to all nations. Saddam Hussein has been engaged in the development of weapons of mass destruction technology which is a threat to countries in the region and he has made a mockery of the weapons inspection process.” — Nancy Pelosi, December 16, 1998

    “Even today, Iraq is not nearly disarmed. Based on highly credible intelligence, UNSCOM [the U.N. weapons inspectors] suspects that Iraq still has biological agents like anthrax, botulinum toxin, and clostridium perfringens in sufficient quantity to fill several dozen bombs and ballistic missile warheads, as well as the means to continue manufacturing these deadly agents. Iraq probably retains several tons of the highly toxic VX substance, as well as sarin nerve gas and mustard gas. This agent is stored in artillery shells, bombs, and ballistic missile warheads. And Iraq retains significant dual-use industrial infrastructure that can be used to rapidly reconstitute large-scale chemical weapons production.” — Ex-Un Weapons Inspector Scott Ritter in 1998

    “There is unmistakable evidence that Saddam Hussein is working aggressively to develop nuclear weapons and will likely have nuclear weapons within the next five years. And that may happen sooner if he can obtain access to enriched uranium from foreign sources — something that is not that difficult in the current world. We also should remember we have always underestimated the progress Saddam has made in development of weapons of mass destruction.” — John Rockefeller, Oct 10, 2002

    “Saddam’s existing biological and chemical weapons capabilities pose a very real threat to America, now. Saddam has used chemical weapons before, both against Iraq’s enemies and against his own people. He is working to develop delivery systems like missiles and unmanned aerial vehicles that could bring these deadly weapons against U.S. forces and U.S. facilities in the Middle East.” — John Rockefeller, Oct 10, 2002

  7. The Bystander says:


    Nice cut and paste job but at the end of the day the Bush administration “misled” the public about the existance weapons of mass destruction. Whether it was accidental or intentional is open to debate. Much like Bengazi.

    My point about the 4 dead Americans is that compared to the shooting gallery enviorment of our own cities, the death of a minor diplomat and several mercenaries in a distant land is not exactly front of mind.

  8. Randy in Richmond says:

    Yea, you caught me – copy and paste. But guess what, it’s 100% true. And apparently you believe John Kerry, Hillary Clinton, Nancy Pelosi, Barbara Boxer, etc. also ‘misled the public’. You have that right.

    And I assume by your huh? comment you didn’t get this post. It points out that there is now evidence that Benghazi is no longer open to debate as to why this administration orchestrated an elaborate coverup – politics.

    Your ignorance of foreign policy is perfectly clear in your referral to an United States Ambassador to a country as a minor diplomat. Your immature opinion that where one dies for their country is somehow relevant is beyond belief.

  9. Barney says:

    “the white house is saying we’re pushing the video because we don’t wanna blame it on the failure of our policies” – krauthammer

    That’s a pretty liberal interpretation of this:

    “To underscore that these protests are rooted in an Internet video, and not a broader failure or policy.”

    Krauthammer says the “mainstream media” will no doubt steer clear of this momentous news story.

    Um, hellooo! FOXNEWS is indeed mainstream media!

    Here are the top twenty media corporations in the U.S.

    1. Time Warner Inc.
    2. Walt Disney Company
    3. Viacom Inc.
    4. News Corporation
    5. CBS Corporation
    6. Cox Enterprises
    7. NBC Universal
    8. Gannett Company, Inc.
    9. Clear Channel Communications Inc.
    10. Advance Publications, Inc.
    11. Tribune Company
    12. McGraw-Hill Companies
    13. Hearst Corporation
    14. Washington Post Company
    15. The New York Times Company
    16. E.W. Scripps Co.
    17. McClatchy Company
    18. Thomson Corporation
    19. Freedom Communications, Inc.
    20. A&E Television Networks

  10. RR please just plug the e-mail Judicial Watch received, admittedly tardy, into the timeline of how the talking points were conceived. http://swampland.time.com/2013/05/16/timeline-the-benghazi-emails/ If this new memo is the “smoking gun” it has to be inconsistent w/the series of e-mails between the CIA, the WH and State. Please explain?

  11. Randy in Richmond says:

    I never refer to Rhodes’ email as a smoking gun but it does qualify. I guess the people at Time never heard the scores of times that dozens of Obama administration officials as well as the US Ambassador to the UN blamed the entire incident on a video tape. Nowhere (that I could find) in Time’s publication of emails do I see the tape mentioned. They do point out that Jay Carney lied, which is standard for this administration. Actually Time’s series of emails further help point out that blaming the tape was mostly, if not entirely, a White House ploy which strengthens the point of this post that politics, not policy, was candidate Obama’s goal in blaming the tape.

  12. RR you do realize all the references to Cairo concern the protests in front of the Embassy attributed to the anti-Muslim video. Fox News can be your guide. http://nation.foxnews.com/egypt-protests/2012/09/11/muslims-attack-us-embassy-burn-american-flag-911-while-team-obama-apologizes.
    You also realize the time piece was from almost 1 year ago. The basic facts haven’t changed only the tenor of the outrage

  13. Confused says:

    You confused my “huh ?” with another commenter which appears to be similar to your confusion about the whole Benghazi non-issue. Rhodes’ email reads like a reasonable approach to communications following a tumultuous week full of protests throughout the Muslim world and, yes, an act of terror. It shows nothing improper. At most, they were guilty of getting it wrong at first but the details were flowing in. There is also the argument that with Obama ahead, he could have capitalized on a terrorist attack to get people to rally around his leadership. Clearly, they chose a lower key approach. I think they responded appropriately.

  14. Randy in Richmond says:

    I love how you earlier linked an article having little to do with this post and then refer to it to make a point.

    Yes, I realize Cairo is mentioned but this post is about Benghazi. There is zero about a video in your Time article so it plays little to no part in my point here. You now link another article, by Fox, which also is entirely about Cairo. Nobody died in Cairo. I don’t care if the video did or did not cause the protest in Cairo. And the basic facts have changed. Redacted emails have been exposed that shows what I have said all along. Probably to diehard Obama fans the tenor will never change. But to those of us tired of the lying our outrage will remain high.

  15. Who do you want answering the phone at 3 a.m.?

  16. Randy in Richmond says:

    We live in different worlds. In my world protesters do not carry grenades, AK-47’s, or Rocket Launchers. And I do not associate the word “reasonable” with lying. Time will tell.

  17. Alex Kilibrand says:

    Pimento Cheese Sandwich

    1 10-oz. package sharp white cheddar
    ½ cup packed, jarred pimientos, finely chopped, plus 1 tbsp. brine, reserved from jar
    ¼ cup mayonnaise
    1 clove garlic, finely chopped
    ½ habanero chile, stemmed, seeded, and finely chopped
    Kosher salt and freshly ground black pepper, to taste
    Tabasco, to taste
    16 slices toasted whole wheat sandwich bread
    8 leaves red-leaf lettuce
    16 slices tomato

    Finely grate cheese on small holes of a box grater and transfer to a food processor, along with peppers, brine, mayonnaise, garlic, and chile. Season with salt, pepper, and Tabasco, and pulse until lightly chunky. Top 8 bread slices with 1 lettuce leaf, 2 slices tomato, and ¼ cup cheese mixture; top with remaining bread.

  18. Alex Kilibrand says:

    “We still have no idea where Obama was while his Ambassador was being burned alive and tortured. Where was he?”

    Tweeted by: Teresa
    Re-tweeted by: Cliven Kilkenny

  19. Michael Stanley says:

    It takes some nerve to troll a site under a fake name and imply the site host is an anti-government racist. It’s even worse to troll said site when the site host is away tending to a loss in the family.

    May you roast in hell, Alex.

  20. Alex Kilibrand says:

    May you have a glorious afterlife, Michael. Say hi to Jesus for me.

  21. Alex, a good Southern woman doesn’t need a recipe for pimento cheese, but thanks for thinking of me.

  22. This Side says:

    All I see is deflection and detraction from those who think it’s OK to forsake the lives of four Americans for political gain. I must say pimento cheese is a new one. What happened in Bhenghazi is despicable. What happened after this is no different.

  23. This Side says:

    To, Randy in Richmond,

    Thank you for compiling the list of politicians who were with Bush on that WMD thing. It has paid off in spades for my exposing liberal liars for who they really are.

  24. Randy in Richmond says:

    To all the Democrats listed in my 10:41am (05/01/14) comment above that believed and spoke to the fact that Saddam Hussein harbored WMD’s – you are vindicated. A recent New York Times article describes how American troops found over 5,000 chemical weapons containing mustard, ricin, and sarin among other deadly agents inside Iraq. While meant to be a hit piece on George Bush the Times’ article is rightfully described in a New York Sun article for what it really is. So again, to all you Democrats, congrats on getting it right pre-Iraq war.