I don’t really think it proper to denigrate Susan Rice for the story she told about Benghazi. If she was given what she thought was authoritative information to present to the American public by the State Department, there would have been no reason for her to doubt that information and present it. Of course, she may have known the information was false, but as of now that is only speculation with many trying to present it as fact.
Yes, he’s just rewarding her for toeing the party line and being a good “player”
How does U.N. rep Susan Rice being provided with C.I.A. talking points compare to that other Rice, National Security Advisor Condi Rice going on TV to scare the people with blatant lies of nuclear holocaust?.“The problem here is that there will always be some uncertainty about how quickly Saddam can acquire nuclear weapons. But we don’t want the smoking gun to be a mushroom cloud”..I’d say not even close.
“…….Please tell me what information Condi Rice had that no one else did that contradicted the what was known at the time?”.What was known at the time was that there were no WMD as determined by U.N. inspector Hans Blix and others. so they lied, fabricated, and drew false conclusions on skimpy and non-existent information. Many in the Administration, including Colin Powell, jumped on the Administration’s fabrications that they left little choice in Congress but to support invasion. Many at the time, including me, suspected lies, lies, lies..As for Benghazi, a lot was going on in that part of the world at the time, including demonstrations against an anti-Muslim video. It takes time to sort out complex issues. To complicate, there were probably clandestine operations going on. Obama the next day in the Rose Garden mentioned the possibility of terrorism. .The ugly truth is that the Right is trying to manufacture a scandal to at least match some of Bush’s boondoggles, and they are failing miserably.
“……A key CIA informant in Iraq admitted that he lied about his allegations, “then watched in shock as it was used to justify the war”.”.So you’re saying that Bush and company were both gullible and stupid..You go to great lengths to describe how unequivocally Obama condemns the Benghazi killings, which is good. Then you go to great lengths to decry the insufficient use of the word “terrorism.” Tell me, are you deader if killed by a killer or an attacker, or deader if killed by a terrorist? Perhaps the right answer is, “Four Americans were killed, what difference at this point does it make?”
I was going to leave a comment, but I see we’ve already gotten to the point in the discussion where everybody is typing and nobody is reading.