Crowley's False Fact Check Saves President, Derails Debate

[Old Rocks]

Perhaps we should respect the wishes of those close to the men that died in Libya.

Chris Stevens' Death In Libya Shouldn't Be Politicized, Father Says

While Stevens would not directly criticize Romney for invoking the attacks in the campaign, he reiterated that the focus should be on his son's memory, not the political implications of his death.

"I’m not sure exactly what [Romney's] been saying and not saying, but our position is it would be a real shame if this were politicized," Stevens said. "Our concern now is memorializing Chris and remembering his contribution to the country."

Last week, the mother of a Navy SEAL killed in the attack made a similar appeal to the Romney campaign, asking the Republican to stop mentioning her son's name on the campaign trail.

"I don't trust Romney. He shouldn't make my son's death part of his political agenda," Barbara Doherty, whose son, Glen was killed in Benghazi, said. "It's wrong to use these brave young men, who wanted freedom for all, to degrade Obama.”

 

[hazlnut]

The GOP and Team Mitt respect nothing...

 

[Nole]

Again, guys, you keep working on the false assumption that Americans are as worked up about this as you are.

so true, Im training a group of young US Marines right now and at breakfast one asked "where were these people (right wingers) during the Iraq war?" I told him for lack of a better term, its the fox news crowd doing what they are told.

 

[Seawytch]

Last week, the mother of a Navy SEAL killed in the attack made a similar appeal to the Romney campaign, asking the Republican to stop mentioning her son's name on the campaign trail.

"I don't trust Romney. He shouldn't make my son's death part of his political agenda," Barbara Doherty, whose son, Glen was killed in Benghazi, said. "It's wrong to use these brave young men, who wanted freedom for all, to degrade Obama.”

Isn't that the same guy Romney introduced himself to four times at the same party?

 

[FJO]

During the segment of the debate when Libya and Benghazi was steered by Crowley in Obama's favor, the phony indignation of the president was reminiscent of Nixon's "I Am Nor A Crook".

 

[freedombecki]

So "acts of terror" and "terrorist attacks" are two different things?

Sheesh.

It's against Sharia law to call cold blooded murderers on Jihad for Allah Terrorists. Obama was showing submission to Shariah by saying what he said rather than to call extremist Muslims the terrorists that they are for their high crimes against humanity.

Any way you roll the dice, Obama's politically correct number is up, and he's going down.

 

[EriktheRed]

Boy, what a difference one debate can make, huh?

 

[freedombecki]

So "acts of terror" and "terrorist attacks" are two different things?

Sheesh.

When he spoke of Benghazi he referred to "efforts to denigrate the religious beliefs of others", i.e., the film which he and his administration spent so much time trying to pin this on in the following days.

When he mentioned "acts of terror" it was in a general statement following a reference to 9/11/2001.

Obama is Orwellian -- he specializes in double talk which can be interpreted the way he wants to interpret it later regardless of what those who listened to the original understood him to say.

Well said, Amelia, and I am so outta rep right now or this information would be in a pm.

 

[freedombecki]

Not to mention Jay Carney's constant spiel. I think Obama feels the walls tumbling down.

That was showing all over his face the last two nights. He screwed up. He denied screwing up. He's too proud to say he screwed up. No apologies to America for making this campaign about the Character Assassination of Mitt Romney, philanthropist and giving American.

Time for Washington Demmies to pack their bags and call the moving vans.

America is gonna get rid of high gasoline prices, rid of Demmie Congresscritters voting to give their children free government loans with 100% payback for their businesses that go bankrupt; no more free rides and catering services for wealthy Demmie Congresscritters like Nancy Pelosi at the expense and inconvenience of the U.S. Air Force that was designed to fight America's enemies in the air; no more overspending and putting the USA into a national debt of $16 trillion dollars for luxuries in a time of war.

The recent Demmie control era was the most blatantly corrupt congress and white house in American History. The press has been shamefully supportive rather than questioning Democrat obfuscation specialists in order to get red carpet treatment and special interviews as reward when they kiss ass to Democrats. It's quid pro quo.

 

[Cheddarmelon]

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZSEM2rYjHcI]Did Obama label the Libya attack as an act of terror? - YouTube[/ame]


WATCH it. all those who are saying "oh, they put out an edited WH transcript"

debate his intent of words if you wish. But he said it.

so stop being dumbfucks.

 

[freedombecki]

The GOP and Team Mitt respect nothing...

Oh, yes, we do. All of us respect the American voter, the American worker, the American taxpayer, the American business owner, the child that is left behind, and we mostly respect the equality that springs forth for our bitter fight against antislavery and bigotry for a century while Democrats blocked every single thing we did for that long one hundred years.

Democrats should thank the GOP for being stubborn and not giving up on civil rights. Eisenhower led the most bitter battle and won it in Arkansas in the fifties by integrating public schools.

Good Evening, My Fellow Citizens: — For a few minutes this evening I want to speak to you about the serious situation that has arisen in Little Rock. To make this talk I have come to the President's office in the White House. I could have spoken from Rhode Island, where I have been staying recently, but I felt that, in speaking from the house of Lincoln, of Jackson and of Wilson, my words would better convey both the sadness I feel in the action I was compelled today to take and the firmness with which I intend to pursue this course until the orders of the Federal Court at Little Rock can be executed without unlawful interference. In that city, under the leadership of demagogic extremists, disorderly mobs have deliberately prevented the carrying out of proper orders from a Federal Court. Local authorities have not eliminated that violent opposition and, under the law, I yesterday issued a Proclamation calling upon the mob to disperse.
This morning the mob again gathered in front of the Central High School of Little Rock, obviously for the purpose of again preventing the carrying out of the Court's order relating to the admission of Negro children to that school.
Whenever normal agencies prove inadequate to the task and it becomes necessary for the Executive Branch of the Federal Government to use its powers and authority to uphold Federal Courts, the President's responsibility is inescapable. In accordance with that responsibility, I have today issued an Executive Order directing the use of troops under Federal authority to aid in the execution of Federal law at Little Rock, Arkansas. This became necessary when my Proclamation of yesterday was not observed, and the obstruction of justice still continues.
It is important that the reasons for my action be understood by all our citizens. As you know, the Supreme Court of the United States has decided that separate public educational facilities for the races are inherently unequal and therefore compulsory school segregation laws are unconstitutional.
Our personal opinions about the decision have no bearing on the matter of enforcement; the responsibility and authority of the Supreme Court to interpret the Constitution are very clear. Local Federal Courts were instructed by the Supreme Court to issue such orders and decrees as might be necessary to achieve admission to public schools without regard to race-and with all deliberate speed.
During the past several years, many communities in our Southern States have instituted public school plans for gradual progress in the enrollment and attendance of school children of all races in order to bring themselves into compliance with the law of the land.
They thus demonstrated to the world that we are a nation in which laws, not men, are supreme.
I regret to say that this truth - the cornerstone of our liberties - was not observed in this instance.
It was my hope that this localized situation would be brought under control by city and State authorities. If the use of local police powers had been sufficient, our traditional method of leaving the problems in those hands would have been pursued. But when large gatherings of obstructionists made it impossible for the decrees of the Court to be carried out, both the law and the national interest demanded that the President take action.
Here is the sequence of events in the development of the Little Rock school case.
In May of 1955, the Little Rock School Board approved a moderate plan for the gradual desegregation of the public schools in that city. It provided that a start toward integration would be made at the present term in the high school, and that the plan would be in full operation by 1963. Here I might say that in a number of communities in Arkansas integration in the schools has already started and without violence of any kind. Now this Little Rock plan was challenged in the courts by some who believed that the period of time as proposed in the plan was too long.
The United States Court at Little Rock, which has supervisory responsibility under the law for the plan of desegregation in the public schools, dismissed the challenge, thus approving a gradual rather than an abrupt change from the existing system. The court found that the school board had acted in good faith in planning for a public school system free from racial discrimination.
Since that time, the court has on three separate occasions issued orders directing that the plan be carried out. All persons were instructed to refrain from interfering with the efforts of the school board to comply with the law.
Proper and sensible observance of the law then demanded the respectful obedience which the nation has a right to expect from all its people. This, unfortunately, has not been the case at Little Rock. Certain misguided persons, many of them imported into Little Rock by agitators, have insisted upon defying the law and have sought to bring it into disrepute. The orders of the court have thus been frustrated.
The very basis of our individual rights and freedoms rests upon the certainty that the President and the Executive Branch of Government will support and insure the carrying out of the decisions of the Federal Courts, even, when necessary with all the means at the President's command.
Unless the President did so, anarchy would result.
There would be no security for any except that which each one of us could provide for himself.
The interest of the nation in the proper fulfillment of the law's requirements cannot yield to opposition and demonstrations by some few persons.
Mob rule cannot be allowed to override the decisions of our courts.
Now, let me make it very clear that Federal troops are not being used to relieve local and state authorities of their primary duty to preserve the peace and order of the community. Nor are the troops there for the purpose of taking over the responsibility of the School Board and the other responsible local officials in running Central High School. The running of our school system and the maintenance of peace and order in each of our States are strictly local affairs and the Federal Government does not interfere except in a very few special cases and when requested by one of the several States. In the present case the troops are there, pursuant to law, solely for the purpose of preventing interference with the orders of the Court.
The proper use of the powers of the Executive Branch to enforce the orders of a Federal Court is limited to extraordinary and compelling circumstances. Manifestly, such an extreme situation has been created in Little Rock. This challenge must be met and with such measures as will preserve to the people as a whole their lawfully-protected rights in a climate permitting their free and fair exercise. The overwhelming majority of our people in every section of the country are united in their respect for observance of the law - even in those cases where they may disagree with that law.
They deplore the call of extremists to violence.
The decision of the Supreme Court concerning school integration, of course, affects the South more seriously than it does other sections of the country. In that region I have many warm friends, some of them in the city of Little Rock. I have deemed it a great personal privilege to spend in our Southland tours of duty while in the military service and enjoyable recreational periods since that time.
So from intimate personal knowledge, I know that the overwhelming majority of the people in the South including those of Arkansas and of Little Rock - are of good will, united in their efforts to preserve and respect the law even when they disagree with it.
They do not sympathize with mob rule. They, like the rest of our nation, have proved in two great wars their readiness to sacrifice for America.
A foundation of our American way of life is our national respect for law.
In the South, as elsewhere, citizens are keenly aware of the tremendous disservice that has been done to the people of Arkansas in the eyes of the nation, and that has been done to the nation in the eyes of the world.
At a time when we face grave situations abroad because of the hatred that Communism bears toward a system of government based on human rights, it would be difficult to exaggerate the harm that is being done to the prestige and influence, and indeed to the safety, of our nation and the world.
Our enemies are gloating over this incident and using it everywhere to misrepresent our whole nation. We are portrayed as a violator of those standards of conduct which the peoples of the world united to proclaim in the Charter of the United Nations. There they affirmed "faith in fundamental human rights" and "in dignity and worth of the human person" and they did so "without distinction as to race, sex, language or religion."
And so, with deep confidence, I call upon the citizens of the State of Arkansas to assist in bringing to an immediate end all interference with the law and its processes. If resistance to the Federal Court orders ceases at once, the further presence of Federal troops will be unnecessary and the City of Little Rock will return to its normal habits of peace and order and a blot upon the fair name and high honor of our nation in the world will be removed.
Thus will be restored the image of America and of all its parts as one nation, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all.
Good night, and thank you very much.
September 24, 1957
President Dwight D. Eisenhower

 

[Annie]

The GOP and Team Mitt respect nothing...

You mean they aren't just going to ignore what happened? You're correct. Obama was and will continue to be hammered by what transpired and the incompetence of the administration.

 

[freedombecki]

You see...here is the problem that the Obama White House now faces. It's inconceivable that someone in the Administration would take upon themselves to be booked on five Sunday news shows (I highly doubt any individual would have to clout to make that happen without the express backing of the President!) and yet Susan Rice goes on TV a week after Obama's Rose Garden speech and she is STILL trying to get the press and the public to buy into the notion that the entire attack was because of the YouTube video.

Then when it becomes obvious with the looming Congressional hearing that their cover story is about to be blown out of the water by people like the former head of security in Libya, the Obama White House suddenly changes it's story and declares that it WAS a terrorist attack after all and that they are working "diligently" to find out who it was and what happened. I would have LOVED to have seen Susan Rice's face that day as she realized that she had just been sacrificed and would forever more be known as the person Obama trotted out to the Sunday news shows to lie repeatedly.

"In an interview with the Washington Post, U.S. Ambassador to the U.N. Susan Rice is doubling down on her appearances on more than five Sunday talk shows days after the 9/11 attack in Benghazi when she blamed the violence on a YouTube video. Rice also said her comments about the video were based on information from the intelligence community, not from political players close to the Obama reelection team.

The administration’s characterization only days after Rice’s TV appearances that the assault in Libya was a terrorist attack has raised questions about why she attributed the incident to a protest that officials now say did not take place. Republicans have pressed for answers on whether she simply went too far in her assessment or was reading from an administration script that was designed to protect President Obama’s record on national security in an election year.

In an interview Monday with The Washington Post, Rice said she relied on daily updates from intelligence agencies in the days before her television appearances and on a set of talking points prepared for senior members of the administration by intelligence officials. She said there was no attempt to pick and choose among possible explanations for the attack.

“Absolutely not,” Rice said. “It was purely a function of what was provided to us” and had been given to Congress the day before.

“Ambassador Rice’s comments were prefaced at every turn with a clear statement that an investigation was underway that would provide the definitive accounting of the events that took place in Benghazi,” said Erin Pelton, spokeswoman for the U.S. Mission to the United Nations.

Rice's comments come just days after State Department officials testified before Congress about the lack of security in Libya leading up to the attack on 9/11. State Department official Charlene Lamb said under oath the attack was watched in real time, putting a dent in Rice's argument and the overall argument put out by the Obama adminstration that "the facts changed.""

This goes under the heading of "hoisted on one's own petard". Gotta love it...

Begosh and begorra! The facts changed! Oh, bwahahahahahahahahaha!

And because of it, the White House residents are gonna change. <giggle>

 

[earlycuyler]

If she was trying to help the President, It didn't work. Its already getting pointed out that she was wrong. In the end it will fire up the Republican base. Don't think it will matter much anyplace else.

 

[freedombecki]

Candy Crowley AKA Barrack Obama's LIVE teleprompter. Too bad she can't get her facts checked correctly.

Obama is an incumbent with a stacked deck at the debates and Romney is still shredding him because he can't run on his record. It's starting to get ugly, Obama's demeanor was incredibly hateful thru the entire debate and I'm sure millions of people noticed it! Romney slapped him around pretty good anyway.

Serves 'em right for slapping taxpayers with a $16 Trillion dollar National Debt! Oh, this isn't good: it's now up to $16,183, 282,000,000 The National Debt Clock in Real Time

 

[EriktheRed]

Barring a disasterous performance, the winner or loser of a presidential debate is almost always decided in the days following, as pundits, reporters, and partisans work to shape a narrative of what happened. And judging from the chatter this morning, Mitt Romney’s losing (but generally solid) performance might — by the end of the week — transform itself into a terrible loss.

His answer on Libya has a lot to do with it. Romney began with a little Republican boilerplate: Asserting that the “buck” stops with the president, hitting the White House for not providing additional security, and hitting Obama for taking his time before condemning the attack as an act of terror.

<snip>

It was the most brutal moment of the debate. More to the point, though, it was a direct product of Romney’s foreign policy convictions, and his substance-less view that the best way to project American strength is to label things as “terror” at every opportunity. What’s more, it was fed into Obama’s (somewhat self-serving) critique: That Romney was and is too eager to politicize a tragedy.

How Romney lost by swinging and missing on Libya - The Plum Line - The Washington Post

 

[WillowTree]

So do any of you smart assed libtards wanna tell us why the obama said the day after the attack "it was terrorists" and then five days later the ambassador to the UN Rice said "No it wasn't it was a spontaneous mob" how come that dumb ass woman still has a job? We'd really like to know.

 

[EriktheRed]

So do any of you smart assed libtards wanna tell us why the obama said the day after the attack "it was terrorists" and then five days later the ambassador to the UN Rice said "No it wasn't it was a spontaneous mob" how come that dumb ass woman still has a job? We'd really like to know.

Romney whiffed and lost the debate last night. Suck on it, little wingnut.

 

[Annie]

So do any of you smart assed libtards wanna tell us why the obama said the day after the attack "it was terrorists" and then five days later the ambassador to the UN Rice said "No it wasn't it was a spontaneous mob" how come that dumb ass woman still has a job? We'd really like to know.

Romney whiffed and lost the debate last night. Suck on it, little wingnut.

I'll take winning on the issues to winning the debate, which is what CNN found.

 

[RollingThunder]

This thread is officially debunked. Let it go, retards. Reality triumphs over your pathetic attempts to spin this.

Behold, the new birtherism...

Indeed. The pathetic righwingnut retards are always grasping at straws but this bit of reality denial takes the cake. Did Obama label the attack on our consulate in Benghazi an "act of terror" as Romoney and the rightwing echo chamber of retards wants to deny? Yes, he did, on two occasions, on Sept 11th and Sept 13th, as the transcripts prove. Was the government also still investigating the attack and trying to determine if this attack was in some way connected to the widespread rioting and demonstrations over the offensive anti-Muslim video that had been occurring all over the region. Well of course they were. Only idiots jump to conclusions without checking. There were several initial reports out of Benghazi that said that gunmen attacked during a demonstration over the video. Check the BBC reports on the incident published on Sept 12th, 13th and 14th that talk about US officials already suspecting that terrorist groups were involved and Libyan officials saying that the attack happened during "an anti-US protest".

Libya attack: Obama vows justice for killed US envoy.
BBC
12 September 2012
(excerpts)
President Barack Obama has vowed to bring to justice those who carried out the attack that killed the US ambassador to Libya. Ambassador J Christopher Stevens died after gunmen stormed the consulate amid protests over an anti-Islamic film. US officials said Washington was investigating whether the attack was organised in advance, rather than a spontaneous assault sparked by demonstrations over the film. Officials told Reuters there were suspicions that a militia known as the Ansar al-Sharia brigade was involved in the attack. The group has denied the claim. They also cited reports suggesting al-Qaeda's north Africa-based affiliate, known as al-Qaeda in the Islamic Maghreb, may have been involved, the news agency reports. The protests followed rallies in Cairo, where demonstrators angry at the film, called Innocence of Muslims, breached the walls of the US embassy and tore down the flag.


Libya attack: US to investigate Benghazi assault
BBC
13 September 2012
(excerpts)
The US is investigating whether the attack in Libya that killed the US ambassador and several other people was planned in advance, officials say. The assault had earlier been thought to have been a spontaneous reaction to protests over an anti-Islamic film. Armed men stormed the consulate in the city of Benghazi on Tuesday night. Officials have now said the attack was complex and professional, and reports suggest the perpetrators may have had links to jihadist groups. A senior US official quoted by AFP news agency said the Benghazi attackers appeared to have used the demonstrations as a pretext to staging an assault. "This was a complex attack," he told the news agency. "They seemed to have used this [protest] as an opportunity." US officials told Reuters news agency there were suspicions that a militia known as the Ansar al-Sharia brigade was responsible, although the group has denied the claim. They said there were also reports that al-Qaeda's north Africa-based affiliate, al-Qaeda in the Islamic Maghreb, may have been involved, the news agency reports.


US Libyan consulate attack: Timeline of events
BBC
14 September 2012
(excerpts)
Investigators are trying to piece together exactly what happened during Tuesday's US consulate attack in the Libyan city of Benghazi. They are trying to establish whether the assault was planned or spontaneous. Libyan Deputy Interior Minister Wanis al-Sharif has told reporters he believes militants used an anti-US protest as cover for the attack, and may have had help from inside the country's security services.


Transcript Truthers: Conservatives Deny Obama Called Libya Attack An "Act Of Terror"
October 16, 2012
(excerpts)
During tonight's presidential debate, moderator Candy Crowley corrected Mitt Romney's false claim that President Obama did not refer to the September 11 attack on the American consulate in Benghazi, Libya as an act of terrorism the day after the attack. Crowley was right, and Romney was wrong: In his September 12 remarks, the president said: "No acts of terror will ever shake the resolve of this great nation, alter that character, or eclipse the light of the values that we stand for. Today we mourn four more Americans who represent the very best of the United States of America." Despite this, conservatives in the media are insisting that Obama never said that.

UPDATE 2: Obama also referred to the Benghazi attack as an "act of terror" while campaigning in Colorado on September 13:

"Let me say at the outset that obviously our hearts are heavy this week -- we had a tough day a couple of days ago, for four Americans were killed in an attack on our diplomatic post in Libya. Yesterday I had a chance to go over to the State Department to talk to friends and colleagues of those who were killed. And these were Americans who, like so many others, both in uniform and civilians, who serve in difficult and dangerous places all around the world to advance the interests and the values that we hold dear as Americans. And a lot of times their work goes unheralded, doesn't get a lot of attention, but it is vitally important. We enjoy our security and our liberty because of the sacrifices that they make. And they do an outstanding job every single day without a lot of fanfare. So what I want all of you to know is that we are going to bring those who killed our fellow Americans to justice. (Applause.) I want people around the world to hear me: To all those who would do us harm, no act of terror will go unpunished. It will not dim the light of the values that we proudly present to the rest of the world. No act of violence shakes the resolve of the United States of America.​

​