CBS News has learned that previously unknown whistleblowers on #Benghazi are now speaking to Congressional investigators.
Retweeted 433 times at last count
*********************************************
JoshuaPundit: One of my Lil' Birdies confirmed this via e-mail. Apparently the Benghazi survivors were under the distinct impression that talking to Congress could result in them being prosecuted by the Obama regime for reveling what was claimed were 'state secrets'.
Apparently some kind of immunity or protection was worked out.
Conservatives and Liberals alike called joint Obama-Hillary interview SOFT… soapy… syrupy (See: Syrupy Minutes - Formatted PDF Version of Full Report). Hillary has now OFFICIALLY stood in support of TWOPresidents who lied to her and her country… What a legacy !! Feeling used? abused? manipulated? If not, you are either a Kool-Aid drinker or not paying attention. And looking forward, Progressive Alinskyites and Soros-followers Obama and Hillary used this forum to begin the next phase of moving America toward globalism and controlling the election of 2016. (Hillary Clinton super PAC launched.)
In a 2016 presidential announcement masquerading as a lovefest masquerading as an interview, President Barack Obama and Secretary of State Hillary Clinton appeared together on 60 Minutes with CBS’ Steve Kroft to discuss how much they adore each other. Kroft, who is the water carrier for both the Clintons and the Obamas – he conducted the famed “Tammy Wynette” interview with the Clintons after the Gennifer Flowers revelations in 1992, and helped bury Obama’s failure to label Benghazi a terrorist attack last year – facilitated the softball rollout of Hillary’s 2016 presidential campaign.
Joe Biden, eat your heart out…
The interview opened with Kroft sycophantically hyperventilating about what an honor it was to do the interview: “This is very improbable. This is not an interview I ever expected to be doing. But I understand, Mr. President, this was your idea. why did you want to do this together, a joint interview?”
The love in the room was palpable. This wasn’t 60 Minutes. It was Sixty Shades of Gray.
After Obama said that Hillary was “one of the finest secretary of states we’ve had” [sic], Kroft then asked if there were any political tea leaves to be read. Hillary avoided the question, as did Obama, both of them flirting with the possibility of a Hillary 2016 run.
The interview went on in this tiresome fashion for some thirty minutes. While Obama and Hillary made googly eyes at each other, Kroft got in hard hitting questions like:
To Obama: Why were you so insistent about wanting her to be Secretary of State?
To Hillary: You’ve been quoted as thinking or telling people that there was no way you were going to take this job and you weren’t going to let anybody talk you into it. (Laughter) What did he say that night that made you [reconsider]?
To Obama: Has she had much influence in this administration?
To both: How would you characterize your relationship right now?
Thanks, Dr. Phil.
The Obama administration is open about the fact that Kroft is their go-to-guy when it comes to their propaganda effort. Even Politico has pointed out that Kroft and 60 Minutes have "fallen prey to accusations of favoritism …. most of Obama’s interviews with Kroft and ‘60 Minutes’ have generated little fanfare. Instead, the platform allows Obama to carry his message about the issues of the day to the American people, and drive the following days news coverage.”
Daily Beast and New York Post columnist Kirstin Powers, a committed liberal, weighed in on the Obama-Hillary Clinton love-fest on “60 Minutes” this morning on America’s Newsroom:
“It really was something you’d expect from the state-run media. It was that kind of level of propaganda… This was a joke. You look at it and just not challenging basic things…” (Video)
Brit Hume: Case For Hillary Clinton "Being A Great Secretary Of State Is Exceedingly Weak"
CHRIS WALLACE: Yeah, I want to pick up on that, Brit, because during the hearing, what struck me was the Republicans were tough on Hillary (Really??), on Benghazi and the Democrats weren't. But, both sides kept on saying what a great secretary of state she had been and to praise her service. And here's some of the points that have been brought up, some of her accomplishments. She helped assemble the bombing campaign in Libya to topple Muammar Qaddafi. She helped assembly the coalition that imposed the toughest sanctions ever on Iran. And, she established diplomatic ties with Burma.
Question, Brit, how do you rate Hillary Clinton's performance, record as our top diplomat?
BRIT HUME: I think those examples you cited would add up to a case for her competence. They do not add up to a case for greatness, after all, the groundwork on Burma had been done by the previous administration. And the administration properly followed through on it. You look across the world, now at the major issues. Are Arabs and Israelis closer to peace? How about Iran and North Korea and their nuclear programs? Have they been halted or seriously set back? Has the reset with Russia, which she so famously introduced with the photo-op in Moscow with the reset button, has they lead to a new and more cooperative relationship? Is there a Clinton doctrine that we can identify that she has articulated and formed as secretary of state? Are there major treaties that she has undertaken and negotiated through to a successful conclusion? I think the answer to all those questions is that she has not. And those are the kinds of things that might mark her as a great secretary of state. She has certainly been industrious. She has visited 112 countries. Her conduct as secretary of state has been highly dignified. She does her homework. There have been no gaffes or blunders. So I think she has been a capable and hard working secretary of state, but I think the case for her being a great secretary of state is exceedingly weak.
A new poll out from CNN shows Romney losing to Obama overall by 6 percentage points. That result would be fine and dandy if the breakdown of the polling sample showed an equal part of Democrats and Republicans with any number of Independents. Curiously, CNN hasn't released a breakdown of the sample they polled.
The real eye-opener here is this: although the poll shows Romney down by 6 overall, it also shows him leading among independents by a whopping 14%. Only in skewed polling results can a candidate be crushing his opponent among indies but lose overall.
Christian Heinze of GOP2012 was the first to report on the discrepancy:
But here's a very curious internal.
Romney leads among independents, 54%-40%. That's a blowout number. Both candidates get 96%-97% of their respective parties, so this means that this sample must have leaned Democratic big-time.
And of course, CNN didn't release the sampling breakdown.
There's no doubt Obama got a convention bounce, but the independent number indicates a pretty severe oversample among Democrats in this poll.
By Brendan Sasso - 05/09/12 05:25 PM ET - The Hillicon
Federal Communications Commission (FCC) Chairman Julius Genachowski testified Wednesday that his agency takes calls to cancel Fox's broadcast licenses "very seriously."
Groups, including Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington (CREW), haveurgedthe FCC to pull Fox's licenses because of evidence that its parent company News Corp. hacked people's phones in the United Kingdom to get stories.
During a Senate Appropriations subcommittee hearing on Wednesday, Sen. Frank Lautenberg (D-N.J.) pressed Genachowski on whether he plans to do anything about the allegations.
Genachowski said it wouldn't be appropriate to comment on a specific case, but that the commission is "certainly aware of the serious issues that have been raised in the U.K."
He noted that the law requires that the FCC only grant broadcast licenses to people of "good character."
"If any issues arise, the commission has an obligation, we would take it very seriously, to look at the record, look at the facts and apply the law," Genachowski said.
A British parliamentary committee ruled earlier this month that News Corp. CEO Rupert Murdoch is "not fit" to run an international media company because of the phone hacking scandal.
News Corp. owns 27 Fox stations in the United States.
Sen. Jay Rockefeller (D-W.Va.), chairman of the Commerce, Science and Transportation Committee, wrote to the British committee probing the scandal earlier this month, requesting that it provide any evidence of whether News Corp. violated any U.S. laws.
**If you want some kind of alternative news to the MSM big 3 time to call, fax or write in, in favor of Fox News and perhaps some of the one-sided slanted coverage, especially on NBC and ABC.**
No gaffs, no real big moments… probably no change in the polls… “Most cerebral…” said Fox newscaster Carl Cameron “Seems the candidates have hit their stride and displayed themselves as they will be in the White House. A lot of time spent attacking Obama and not each other” (finally) at the CBS News/National Journal Foreign Policy Debate on Saturday night There was a lot of agreement among the group, except when it came to foreign aid to Pakistan.
“If we re-elect Barack Obama, Iran will have a nuclear weapon. And if you elect Mitt Romney, Iran will not have a nuclear weapon,” predicted the former Massachusetts governor.
On waterboarding, Herman Cain and Rep. Michelle Bachmann both said they would reinstate the technique designed to simulate drowning. Cain went one step further, adding that he would leave it up to military leaders – rather than their civilian superiors – to decide what forms of interrogation amount to torture, which he said he opposes.
On Afghanistan, former Utah Gov. Jon Huntsman and Rep. Ron Paul of Texas both said it was time for U.S. troops to come home after a war of 10 years duration.
“There are a number of ways to be smart about Iran, and a few ways to be stupid. The administration skipped all the ways to be smart,” said former House Speaker Newt Gingrich.
The tone was set at the outset, when the Republicans were asked if they would support a pre-emptive strike to prevent Iran from acquiring a nuclear weapon.
Gingrich quickly agreed with Romney, saying that if all other steps failed, “you have to take whatever steps are necessary” to prevent the Islamic regime from gaining a nuclear weapon.
Former Sen. Rick Santorum of Pennsylvania agreed. Noting that a mysterious computer virus had caused disruption inside Iran’s nuclear labs, and that Iranian scientists have been killed in recent months, he said, “I hope that the U.S. has been involved” in those and other covert actions.
Paul wanted no part of a military strike. “It’s not worthwhile to go to war,” he said. He added said that if America’s security is threatened the president must ask Congress for a formal declaration of war before taking military action.
Perry responded without answering the question. “This country can sanction the Iranian central bank right now and shut down that country’s economy, and that’s what the president needs to do,” he said.
The war in Afghanistan produced the same response as the question relating to Iran’s nuclear ambitions – unanimous criticism of the president, but differences among the Republicans seeking to take his place.
Huntsman, who served as Obama’s first ambassador to China, said it was time to withdraw all U.S. troops from Afghanistan, a land where their boots first touched the soil a decade ago. “I say it’s time to come home. I say this nation has achieved its key objectives,” he said.
Romney and Perry said they would side with military commanders on the ground about when to withdraw troops. They criticized Obama for “telegraphing” the nation’s intentions.
Yet Romney backed a timetable of a complete withdrawal by the end of 2014, the same as Obama has cited.
What jumped out to me while watching was the rude way Michelle Bachmann was treated. She as for 30-secs to give a rebuttal or make a point and the host never even acknowledged her. See the CBS email leaked below.
Michele Bachmann's plenty steamed about her treatment in last night's CBS News/National Journal debate between GOP presidential candidates. And she's got the evidence ...
If you missed the debate you can catch it below (Videos 1 – 7 )
The latest soundings show Cain the current leader in that sweepstakes, although Gingrich has risen significantly in national polls in recent weeks as Perry has fallen back. And while the subject matter of defense and foreign policy didn’t readily lend itself to a discussion of the principal campaign controversies, the race has had plenty of them in the past two weeks.
Cain has stoutly denied any and all charges of sexual harassment – four women have leveled accusations – while Perry embarked on an apology tour after failing in a debate Wednesday night to remember the name of the third of three Cabinet-level departments he wants to abolish. In this clip, Rick Perry pokes fun at his Department of Energy gaffe:
When the cable stations host the debates they cover the whole thing… whether they are 75-mins, 90-mins or 2-hours and then often have follow-up coverage with the candidates. CBS covered the 1st hour and then you had to go online to see the rest if wanted to. Any network that bids on these debates needs to cover the whole thing or shouldn’t be given a debate. Fox the does the best job hands-down, so why don’t we go with the best?
Leaked CBS memo backs Bachmann 'snub' charge
WASHINGTON – Michele Bachmann's plenty steamed about her treatment in tonight's CBS News/National Journal debate between GOP presidential candidates.
Several times throughout the course of the 90-minute presentation, Rep. Bachmann, R-Minn., attempted to follow-up questions and answers by other candidates – just as the moderators of the debate suggested they would be allowed to do at their discretion.
But despite often vociferous attempts to weigh in, the moderators chose other candidates.
Now the Bachmann campaign is going public with evidence CBS News planned all along to snub her.
Keith Nahigian, Bachmann’s campaign manager posted on her Facebook page an email exchange between CBS News political director John Dickerson and correspondent Caroline Horn in which Dickerson suggested before the debate "she's not going to get many questions."
Nahigian commented that the memo represents "concrete evidence of what every conservative knows – the liberal mainstream media elites are manipulating the Republican debates by purposely suppressing our conservative message and limiting Michele’s questions."
Republican presidential candidates Jon Huntsman, Michele Bachman, Ron Paul, Herman Cain, Mitt Romney, Newt Gingrich, Rick Perry and Rick Santorum before the Republican presidential debate in South Carolina. Photograph: John Adkisson/Reuters
Jack Abramoff explains exactly how he was able to corrupt over 100 Congressmen and get them to pass (or block) any legislation he requested. The message? Congress works for special interests, not for the people.
Sarah Palin looks back at a crowd as she walks to the door of Trump Tower for a scheduled meeting with Donald Trump in New York, May 31, 2011. (Credit: AP Photo/Craig Ruttle)
Sarah Palin is either running for President or she should be: That's the takeaway from "The Undefeated," a new movie about Palin's life and leadership set to hit theaters next month.
Billed as a documentary - though told in a fast-paced and dramatic style - the two-hour movie is an unabashed defense of the former Alaska governor that leaves the distinct impression her presidential candidacy not only is possible, but inevitable.
Stephen Bannon, the movie's creator, took on the project after Palin's aides approached him late last year about making a series of videos on Palin. He proposed a movie instead, and bankrolled it himself. The final product, which I saw last week in a screening for a few reporters, gives Palin the introduction she never really had when the Hockey mom from Wasilla became John McCain's running mate in 2008.
By tracing her political rise in Alaska, her battles with Big Oil and the Republican establishment, and her accomplishments as governor, the movie argues one overriding point: Sarah Palin is a seasoned executive who is more than qualified to be President.
It also adds context to her bus tour of historic sites and patriotic events, which she says she undertook to remind people about the principles America was founded on and the importance of the Constitution. Critics have questioned whether the tour is, in fact, just a big publicity stunt, but "The Undefeated" shows video of a young Palin echoing some of those same themes 20 years ago, when she was a rookie on the stump campaigning for office.
That's one of the things I found most striking about the movie. Since Palin burst on the national scene in 2008, critics have portrayed her as an unformed and uninformed political thinker, suggesting someone just crammed her head with these ideas and unleashed her on America.
But "The Undefeated" goes a long way towards debunking that tired narrative. It shows an unbroken line in her thinking over the past two decades. The things she's saying on her bus tour about freedom, free markets, fiscal responsibility and the proper role of government are the same things she's been saying ever since she entered into politics.
It got me to thinking about the grossly unfair and inaccurate story line that developed over the years about Justice Clarence Thomas - another favorite target of the Left. The rap on Thomas was that he was unqualified for the Supreme Court and incapable of serious thought - so as a Justice, he blindly followed conservative superstar Antonin Scalia.
That narrative is not only offensive, but flat-out wrong, as documents in the Library of Congress make clear. Thomas never followed Scalia; he had his own powerful views, and often persuaded Scalia to follow HIM.
Thomas still is mocked and scorned by his critics, who refuse to give him any credit for his accomplishments or ideas. But he doesn't care about critics, and he doesn't try to appease them. That reminds me of Palin, too.
This movie won't appease her critics. There are no olive branches in it. In fact, the opening sequence is a relentless assault - a montage of the breathtakingly offensive and vile things said about Palin and her family.
The first half of the movie focuses on Alaska - not only on Palin's accomplishments there, but on the unique qualities of self-reliance and independence of the state itself. The second hour chronicles Palin's stint as the vice presidential nominee.
Bannon used Palin's voice from the audio recording of her book, "Going Rogue," to narrate the movie. He says he had complete editorial control over it, and that Palin only saw the finished product two weeks ago. According to Bannon, she said it "blew her away."
It's easy to see why. If you like Sarah Palin, the movie will make you like her even more. Using never-before seen video, it shows Palin taking on the machine and winning, while racking up whopping 80 percent approval ratings in the state. And you will feel fresh outrage about how savagely she has been treated and mocked by Hollywood and the liberal elite.
But if you don't like Sarah Palin, the movie is unlikely to change your mind. (Frankly, if you don't like Palin, you probably won't be shelling out any money to go see it in the first place). You'll probably think of it as a one-sided campaign ad and wonder where the critics are.
I would suggest that we all open our minds and take a second look and listen to all the candidates and what they stand for and say… instead of making a decision based on what has been orchestrated for us to see and believe by the mainstream progressive media! There is too much at stake not to!
Regardless of where you come down, though, here's one thing both sides should agree on: It certainly looks like Palin is running for President. As she says in a speech in the movie's very last scene: "Mr. President, game on."
Sharyl Attkisson
