OT: Obama's Press Secretary's Fine Performance of Non-Answer on Benghazi

Obama White House spokesman Jay Carney answers questions from reporters with facts and details totally unrelated to the questions, and the reporters are left wondering what in the world they just heard and why, forgetting to press for real answers. Classic.

"Terms of reference". Sir Humphrey Appleby would be proud.

From White House Dossier by Keith Koffler (5/9/2013):

Internal Benghazi Review Ignored Clinton, Obama

The internal State Department Accountability Review Board report being touted by the White House as an “unsparing” investigation into the Benghazi response actually completely spared the two individuals whose actions Republicans want to know about most: President Obama and former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton.

There is no mention in the report of the what Clinton or Obama did related to Benghazi. In fact, Obama isn’t mentioned at all in the document, and Clinton only once – in the context of her appointing the Review Board. There is no suggestion that Clinton or Obama were interviewed or even examined by the investigation.

What’s more, Accountability Review Boards are part of statutory State Department process that is not legally permitted to investigate the president.

It’s not even clear that an Accountability Review Board is permitted to probe the Secretary of State. The purview of a Review Board covers “employees” of the State Department who could be subject to discipline by the Secretary of State, who presumably would not be tasked to discipline herself.

Despite all this, White House Press Secretary Jay Carney Wednesday suggested the Review Board report exculpates Clinton.

From the briefing:

Q    So the White House is confident that Hillary Clinton acted appropriately throughout this process?
MR. CARNEY:  We are.  And I think I would point you to the Accountability Review Board and what –
Q    Which didn’t –
MR. CARNEY:  I think I would point you to the report the put out.  I would point you to what the two heads of that board, Ambassador Pickering and Admiral Mullen — each highly praised by both sides of the aisle for their long, distinguished careers — put out in a statement this week:  “From the beginning of the ARB process, we had unfettered access to everyone and everything, including all of the documentation we needed.  Our marching orders were to get to the bottom of what happened, and that is what we did.”
Again, this is an unsparing report done by two career professionals, nonpartisan career professionals, that contain within it very serious recommendations, found shortcomings that needed to be corrected, and the State Department acted immediately on that.

But there is no evidence Pickering and Mullin ever talked to Clinton, or that they even sought to.

Carney dodged a question about whether Obama was interviewed by the Review Board.

Q    On the question of the Accountability Review Board, you keep saying it was unsparing and you said they had unfettered access.  Did Admiral Mullen and Mr. Pickering interview the President about what he did on the night of September 11th?
MR. CARNEY:  Again, I will point you to what Admiral Mullen and Ambassador Pickering said and what the report said, beginning with the fact that — this is useful here.  The Accountability Review Board investigation, headed by, as I said, two of the most respected, non-partisan leaders in Washington, found that the interagency response was timely and appropriate and “helped save the lives of two severely wounded Americans.”

Here’s a video of the exchange, in which Carney appears a little flustered. [video at the link]

Note that this is a classic case of press secretary spin, in which the answer contains a litany of facts wholly unrelated to the question and designed to draw attention away from the fact that the press secretary is not addressing the issue that was raised.

In this case, Carney was successful. There was no follow up.

"Terms of reference" dialog between Minister Hacker and Sir Humphrey Appleby, from "Yes, Minister: Doing the Honours" (1981), from IMDb:

Sir Humphrey Appleby: Minister, if you block honours pending economies, you might create a dangerous precedent.

James Hacker: You mean that if we do the right thing this time, we might have to do the right thing again next time. It seems on that philosophy, nothing would ever get done at all.

Sir Humphrey Appleby: On the contrary, many, many things must be done...

Sir Humphrey Appleby, James Hacker: [together] but nothing must be done for the first time.

Sir Humphrey Appleby: No, no, Minister. What I mean is that I am fully seized of your aims and of course I will do my utmost to see that they are put into practice.

James Hacker: If you would.

Sir Humphrey Appleby: And to that end, I recommend that we set up an interdepartmental committee with fairly broad terms of reference so that at the end of the day we'll be in the position to think through the various implications and arrive at a decision based on long-term considerations rather than rush prematurely into precipitate and possibly ill-conceived action which might well have unforeseen repercussions.

James Hacker: You mean no.

Well, fictional Minister Hacker saw it through.

Tweet

Susan Rice Withdraws from Secretary of State Consideration

From Yahoo News (12/13/2012):

Susan Rice, the embattled U.S. Ambassador for the U. N., withdrew her name from consideration Thursday to be Secretary of State.

President Barack Obama confirmed the news in a statement Thursday afternoon, saying "While I deeply regret the unfair and misleading attacks on Susan Rice in recent weeks, her decision demonstrates the strength of her character, and an admirable commitment to rise above the politics of the moment to put our national interests first."

Ms. Rice was the one who was sent to the media right after the attack on the US consulate in Benghazi, Libya in September 11 this year to tell the public it was a spontaneous attack stemming from the demonstration against the anti-Islam movie.

Never mind that there was no demonstration that day at the consulate, as admitted by Ms. Rice herself, albeit more than 2 months later.

Attacking her for her lies is "racist" and "sexist" in the US.

It was reported in early November, right before the US presidential election (and therefore totally ignored), that the Benghazi consulate was an CIA outfit.

Tweet

Reuters on Benghazi Consulate Attack: White House Knew, Within 2 Hours

that "an Islamic militant group had claimed credit for the attack" via the emails from the State Department's Operations Center.

That's in addition to the near-real-time footage taken by the Predator drone over the Benghazi Consulate as the attack was happening on September 11, 2012.

From Reuters (10/24/2012):

White House told of militant claim two hours after Libya attack: emails

By Mark Hosenball

(Reuters) - Officials at the White House and State Department were advised two hours after attackers assaulted the U.S. diplomatic mission in Benghazi, Libya, on September 11 that an Islamic militant group had claimed credit for the attack, official emails show.

The emails, obtained by Reuters from government sources not connected with U.S. spy agencies or the State Department and who requested anonymity, specifically mention that the Libyan group called Ansar al-Sharia had asserted responsibility for the attacks.

The brief emails also show how U.S. diplomats described the attack, even as it was still under way, to Washington.

U.S. Ambassador Christopher Stevens and three other Americans were killed in the Benghazi assault, which President Barack Obama and other U.S. officials ultimately acknowledged was a "terrorist" attack carried out by militants with suspected links to al Qaeda affiliates or sympathizers.

Administration spokesmen, including White House spokesman Jay Carney, citing an unclassified assessment prepared by the CIA, maintained for days that the attacks likely were a spontaneous protest against an anti-Muslim film.

While officials did mention the possible involvement of "extremists," they did not lay blame on any specific militant groups or possible links to al Qaeda or its affiliates until intelligence officials publicly alleged that on September 28.

There were indications that extremists with possible al Qaeda connections were involved, but also evidence that the attacks could have erupted spontaneously, they said, adding that government experts wanted to be cautious about pointing fingers prematurely.

U.S. intelligence officials have emphasized since shortly after the attack that early intelligence reporting about the attack was mixed.

Spokesmen for the White House and State Department had no immediate response to requests for comments on the emails.

MISSIVES FROM LIBYA

The records obtained by Reuters consist of three emails dispatched by the State Department's Operations Center to multiple government offices, including addresses at the White House, Pentagon, intelligence community and FBI, on the afternoon of September 11.

The first email, timed at 4:05 p.m. Washington time - or 10:05 p.m. Benghazi time, 20-30 minutes after the attack on the U.S. diplomatic mission allegedly began - carried the subject line "U.S. Diplomatic Mission in Benghazi Under Attack" and the notation "SBU", meaning "Sensitive But Unclassified."

The text said the State Department's regional security office had reported that the diplomatic mission in Benghazi was "under attack. Embassy in Tripoli reports approximately 20 armed people fired shots; explosions have been heard as well."

The message continued: "Ambassador Stevens, who is currently in Benghazi, and four ... personnel are in the compound safe haven. The 17th of February militia is providing security support."

A second email, headed "Update 1: U.S. Diplomatic Mission in Benghazi" and timed 4:54 p.m. Washington time, said that the Embassy in Tripoli had reported that "the firing at the U.S. Diplomatic Mission in Benghazi had stopped and the compound had been cleared." It said a "response team" was at the site attempting to locate missing personnel.

A third email, also marked SBU and sent at 6:07 p.m. Washington time, carried the subject line: "Update 2: Ansar al-Sharia Claims Responsibility for Benghazi Attack."

The message reported: "Embassy Tripoli reports the group claimed responsibility on Facebook and Twitter and has called for an attack on Embassy Tripoli."

While some information identifying recipients of this message was redacted from copies of the messages obtained by Reuters, a government source said that one of the addresses to which the message was sent was the White House Situation Room, the president's secure command post.

Other addressees included intelligence and military units as well as one used by the FBI command center, the source said.

(Full article at the link)

Tweet

#Libya: Benghazi Celebration vs Libya State TV

Screen shot from Al Jazeera Live Feed. LOL.

Tweet

CNN's Ben Wedeman from Inside #Libya: Benghazi Celebrates

This is a still shot from CNN's Ben Wedeman's video report from #Benghazi on February 23, 2011. This is just awesome (for lack of more flamboyant word). Click on the photo to go to the Youtube video.

It's almost better that the West and the international organizations like UN have managed to stay out of Libya (not by design but by incompetence) while determined people in Libya take back one city after another, though with immense sacrifice.

I have no doubt that they will reclaim all of their country from Gaddafi and his dwindling but still very deadly followers.

CNN's Ben Wedeman tweeted that storeowners in Benghazi are refusing to take money from journalists, as they are just happy to have them there. Also, "Heard in Benghazi: "Ben Ali of #Tunisia fell on a Friday, Mubarak of #Egypt fell on a Friday, Qaddafi will fall this Friday."

Tweet