Congresswoman Michelle Bachmann hammered former CIA Deputy Director Mike Morell at yesterdays Intelligence Committee hearing as youll see in the video:
Bachmanns analysis of Morells testimony in an exclusive follow up interview with WND is even better:
Morell verified something I knew way back at the height of the Cold War. Never let Democrats come anywhere near an intelligence agency. Today, they have control of the entire intelligence community. If you doubt me ask yourself where Mike Morells loyalty will reside if he ever does become CIA Director? Answer: Right now the Clintons owe him one, as CIA director he will owe the Clintons personal loyalty along with loyalty to their global agenda. No small thing when youre talking about the CIAs resources and expertise.
Parenthetically, the CIA operates outside the US and away from the watchful eye of domestic intelligence agencies. A CIA director loyal to the Clintons ties in nicely with Jamie Gorelicks Memo.
My guess is that fewer than 10 people know who issued the order to the US military to stand down while the attack in Benghazi was in progress. Neither Congress nor the media seem interested in learning who gave the order. Compiling a short list of suspects is the best the Internet can do. Hillary Clinton and Valerie Jarrett are neck and neck at the top of my list with Leon Panetta, and Martin Dempsey running a whisker behind the fillies.
If truth be told, I lean toward Clinton because she losses the most; however, I dont want to see any congressional committee proving it until after she hopefully gets her partys nomination in 2016. I know its a gamble because nothing sticks to that woman. Shes the only person I know of where the worst lies you can say about her improves her image.
If then-Secretary of State Hillary Clinton did issue the order to stand down that might be the one that finally resonates with voters if Congress releases the proof at the right time. There is a better chance of that happening after Democrats lose the Senate. Impaneling a select committee would be foolish while Harry Reid runs the Senate. Impartial, bipartisan, truth, mean nothing to that man.
Finally, remember that al-Qaedas attack in Benghazi frightened Democrats into executing the dumbest, most inept, cover up imaginable 6 weeks before the presidential election in 2012. How stupid was the Administration to send Suzy Five Shows out there to say things that a 10 year old could disprove in a minute? Sad to say it worked because Barack Taqiyya got a second term. Nevertheless, just think how terrified Hillarys people must be of a 2016 October Surprise that nails her for issuing the stand down order. No cover up will work on that one. No media whitewash, or blackout, will give her a first term.
[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AnOnfHRwi5k&feature=player_embedded]Bachmann Challenges Former Acting CIA Director on Benghazi - YouTube[/ame]
Bachmanns analysis of Morells testimony in an exclusive follow up interview with WND is even better:
Morell verified something I knew way back at the height of the Cold War. Never let Democrats come anywhere near an intelligence agency. Today, they have control of the entire intelligence community. If you doubt me ask yourself where Mike Morells loyalty will reside if he ever does become CIA Director? Answer: Right now the Clintons owe him one, as CIA director he will owe the Clintons personal loyalty along with loyalty to their global agenda. No small thing when youre talking about the CIAs resources and expertise.
Parenthetically, the CIA operates outside the US and away from the watchful eye of domestic intelligence agencies. A CIA director loyal to the Clintons ties in nicely with Jamie Gorelicks Memo.
My guess is that fewer than 10 people know who issued the order to the US military to stand down while the attack in Benghazi was in progress. Neither Congress nor the media seem interested in learning who gave the order. Compiling a short list of suspects is the best the Internet can do. Hillary Clinton and Valerie Jarrett are neck and neck at the top of my list with Leon Panetta, and Martin Dempsey running a whisker behind the fillies.
If truth be told, I lean toward Clinton because she losses the most; however, I dont want to see any congressional committee proving it until after she hopefully gets her partys nomination in 2016. I know its a gamble because nothing sticks to that woman. Shes the only person I know of where the worst lies you can say about her improves her image.
If then-Secretary of State Hillary Clinton did issue the order to stand down that might be the one that finally resonates with voters if Congress releases the proof at the right time. There is a better chance of that happening after Democrats lose the Senate. Impaneling a select committee would be foolish while Harry Reid runs the Senate. Impartial, bipartisan, truth, mean nothing to that man.
Finally, remember that al-Qaedas attack in Benghazi frightened Democrats into executing the dumbest, most inept, cover up imaginable 6 weeks before the presidential election in 2012. How stupid was the Administration to send Suzy Five Shows out there to say things that a 10 year old could disprove in a minute? Sad to say it worked because Barack Taqiyya got a second term. Nevertheless, just think how terrified Hillarys people must be of a 2016 October Surprise that nails her for issuing the stand down order. No cover up will work on that one. No media whitewash, or blackout, will give her a first term.
