The American Spectator

home
ADVERTISEMENT
Print Email
Text Size

The Spectacle Blog

The Candy-Obama Controversy: ‘Get the Transcript’

By on 10.18.12 @ 10:17AM

A number of readers have either posted in the comment section beneath my piece on The Candy Crowley Tipping Point or written to me about this exchange from the debate the other night. (The controversial part in bold.)

Romney: I want to make sure we get that for the record, because it took the President 14 days before he called the attack in Benghazi an act of terror.

Obama: Get the transcript.

Crowley: He did, in fact, sir. So let me call it an act of terror in the Rose Garden. He used the word—

Obama: Can you say that a little louder, Candy? (Applause.)

Crowley: He did call it an act of terror. It did, as well, take—it did, as well, take two weeks or so for the whole idea of there being a riot out there about this tape to come out. You are correct about that. (Applause.)

In other words, the question is being raised as to why, of all the material Crowley could possibly have had in front of her that night, Candy Crowley had the transcript from the Rose Garden Benghazi statement — and Obama seemed to know that. Did she actually have the transcript right there? Did the President know that ahead of time? Or was she recalling what she (mistakenly) thought she knew from memory?

Crowley’s on-the-record comments thus far on the debate topic include this:

“Well, you know, again, I’d heard the president’s speech at the time. I sort of re-read a lot of stuff about Libya because I knew we’d probably get a Libya question, so I kind of wanted to be up on it. So we knew that the president had, had said, you know, these acts of terrors [sic] won’t stand or whatever the whole quote was and I think actually, you know, because, right after that I did turn around and say but you are totally correct, that they spent two weeks telling us that this was about a tape and that there was a, you know, this riot right outside the Benghazi consulate, which there wasn’t. So he was right in the main but I just think he picked the wrong word.”

That’s all that’s been said thus far. Did she actually have a copy right in front of her? Hard to tell whether she had notes on the subject or the actual transcript. In any event, she certainly gave the impression that she might have a copy of the transcript with her when she responded to Obama’s command and said to Romney:

“He did, in fact, sir. So let me call it an act of terror in the Rose Garden. He used the word…”

Remembering that Crowley herself picked the questions to be asked of each candidate, and that she knew ahead of time audience member Kerry Ladka would be asking about Benghazi, it is reasonable to believe she had the transcript in front of her for reference in case it came up.

Did she at any point say to some Obama staffer something along the lines of “Oh by the way, I have the transcript of the Rose Garden statement on Benghazi with me for the debate”?

She hasn’t said.

But suffice to say, there are a lot of people raising the question of behind-the-scenes coordination — all stemming from Obama’s instruction (and it certainly sounded like an instruction) to “Get the transcript.” Followed instantly by Crowley complying — and silencing Romney on the topic. When Romney was indeed correct.

We report. You decide.

View all comments (85) |

MainelyDoc| 10.18.12 @ 11:09AM

The link below details what she said on the View or to the View: "She said that while she was wearing an earpiece for the conversation, no one was prompting her about what to say, particularly in that moment. She had a transcript of the President’s Rose Garden remarks in front of her, she said, and that’s why she made her remark." http://popwatch.ew.com/2012/10.....iew-libya/

MainelyDoc| 10.18.12 @ 11:11AM

In rewatching the debate... she certainly seems to be holding up "the papers" to wave at Mitt... She had only a few papers on her podium and that was the only time I saw her use her papers as a prop.

MainelyDoc| 10.18.12 @ 11:42AM

You can clearly see that Obama points to Candy..."get the transcript". This video view doesn't show Candy waving the sheaf of papers at Romney as she "corrects" him. Obama's "proceed" comments were encouraging Romney to move to point where Obama could demand..."Get the transcript" to his fat sycophant at the podium.
http://forums.corvetteforum.co.....-what.html

RCV| 10.18.12 @ 11:45AM

You guys are better than the 9/11 "truthers" on the far left!

JD| 10.18.12 @ 12:28PM

You're an idiot. You know full well what this was, but you can't admit it.

Liberals demand incredible stupidity from the public. You complain vehemently when we're not dumb enough to fall for your crap.

C. Vernon Crisler | 10.18.12 @ 1:49PM

RCV, this was a clear case where Obama tried to mislead the audience, aided by the unrepentant Crowley.

Why can't he just admit he was wrong in blaming some obscure video? Why all the misdirection?

CJW| 10.18.12 @ 2:47PM

Obama is in full mode of CoverUp2.

First they blamed that Benghazi attack on a video.

There was a two week campaig of lying , apologies, and disinformation to say it was caused by a video, and not a planned terrrorrist attack.

Now, when their lies are obvious, Obama is saying he termed that Benghazi attack a terrorrist attack on Monday.
He did not call it a terrorrist attack. But, even if you want to give Obama the benefit of a large doubt that he meant to call it a terrorrist attack on Monday, then why did he and his lackeys lie for two weeks? Rice, Hillary, Baghdad Bob Carney, and the rest all said the attack was caused by the video. Obama said that directly to his buddy Letterman.

Now the latest misdirection is to say Obama called it a terrorrist attack and hope everyone forgets that he lied for two weeks that it was an attack caused by a video. Unless he now says that it was a terrorrist attck caused by a video?

Oldefarte| 10.18.12 @ 2:43PM

THEY DIED, HE LIED!!!!!!!!!!!!

mzk| 10.21.12 @ 2:14AM

I thought you were smarter than this. What does "get the transcript mean"?

MainelyDoc| 10.18.12 @ 11:46AM

This clip shows Candy waving her papers at Mitt.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PzdWnigWY0o

RCV| 10.18.12 @ 12:08PM

Those "papers" are the same ones she's always looking at while the candidates are speaking; they're the questions from the audience that's chosen.

Crowley is a senior White House correspondent for CNN; she was there in the Rose Garden the day the President spoke.

Your paranoia is so laughable!

MainelyDoc| 10.18.12 @ 12:11PM

Were I an Obama sycophant, I'd feel the same as you do about this issue. I'm not offended by you calling me paranoid.

Catalina| 10.18.12 @ 1:38PM

Sorry, she did say on the View that she had the transcript at the debate.

Oldefarte| 10.18.12 @ 2:42PM

THEY DIED, HE LIED!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Oldefarte| 10.18.12 @ 2:44PM

PS: You're a GD liar as well!!!!!!!

Maru| 10.18.12 @ 3:14PM

Catalina is right. "Crowley had a transcript of the President’s Rose Garden remarks in front of her, she said, and that’s why she made her remark." http://popwatch.ew.com/2012/10.....iew-libya/ It really was strange and too convenient. The moment the President said, "Please proceed," to Governor Romney, I became apprehensive.

JD| 10.18.12 @ 12:28PM

Can somebody please explain the Left's recent obsession with "binders" to me? I keep asking them about it on their websites, but I get only two flavors of answer:

1. "If you don't understand it, that proves how sexist you are!" - a classic evasion. What they're really saying is "The emperor has no clothes" - in this case, they have no idea what's wrong with it either.

2. They suggest that Romney "shouldn't have had to look so hard to find qualified women", or that in looking that way, he implied that there are fewer qualified women to find than qualified men.

But Romney clearly stated that he wasn't getting applications from qualified women, so he HAD to go looking for them. How is that his fault? What was he supposed to do - walk down the street and have qualified women just appear to him?

In no way does this line of thinking explain what makes the word "binders" in particular offensive.

And how do Democrats have any standing to condemn the seeking out of qualified minorities? They've been ramming Affirmative Action down our throats for decades! What is Affirmative Action if not the requirement that businesses go out of their way to find minorities to employ (qualified or not)? Are Democrats really slamming Romney for practicing AA?

In fact, their suggestion that he shouldn't have needed to go out of his way is a suggestion that AA is unnecessary! What hypocrites (as always)!

C. Vernon Crisler | 10.18.12 @ 1:52PM

It's called desparation....

C. Vernon Crisler | 10.18.12 @ 1:52PM

Desperation. **&&

mzk| 10.21.12 @ 2:15AM

I think one needs to realize that this was a somewhat different time. Today this would be different.

But given the quality of Obama's appointees (such as Hilary) I suggest he ask Romney to borrow those binders.

autumn| 10.18.12 @ 1:57PM

I am so glad someone has noticed this. Just how in the world did Obama know that Crowley had a transcript of the Rose Garden statement????!!!! This could only happen if they were " in cahoots" before the debate began--where is the media on this???

RJ| 10.18.12 @ 2:37PM

In reviewing the 2004 debate questions, it is highly likely that for some time there has been pre-debate coordination between the debate moderators and the Democratic nominee's campaign. Much of the media are partisans.

RJ| 10.18.12 @ 2:08PM

It has gone well beyond media bias. It has turned into media partisanship. Let's make the farce complete and have Jay Carney, Harry Reid or Nancy Pelosi serve as the "moderator" for the last debate.

Tommie T| 10.18.12 @ 2:16PM

Obama and Candy should continue to argue their point - quote - No acts of terror will ever shake the resolve of this great nation - endquote - All they have to argue now is that the attack was more than one act of terror. First was going over the wall. Then attacking the building. Then burning it down. Three acts of terror. That way they can be right again. And stop bowing to the GOP.

Oldefarte| 10.18.12 @ 2:40PM

Who give a rat's youknowhat about this FAT PIG or her MSM lies? """"14""""", count them fourteen days after 9/11/12, Susan Rice was appearing on five national TV shows declaring in no uncertain terms that this Benghazi incident was the result of riots from a anti-Muslim video, and additionally POTUS Howdy-Doody was speaking before the UN saying the same exact thing. Quit PC'ing this crapola and simply tell the TRUTH........THEY DIED, HE LIED!!!!!!!!!

DRed| 10.18.12 @ 3:19PM

I knew that Obama had called it an act of terror in his rose garden speech. I think I'd read about it in an article discussing the vice presidential debate. Is it really that crazy that a reporter who covers politics for a living would also have known about that?

You'd think that would also be something that Mitt Romney or his people would have known, but apparently they just repeat whatever lies are in the mainstream right wing media without looking into them. If Mittens had bothered doing his homework he wouldn't have been embarrassed on national TV and you all wouldn't have to make up these ridiculous conspiracies to explain away his gaffe.

Nick| 10.18.12 @ 3:31PM

That is not even mediocre spin, DRed.
Debbie Blabbermouth-Putz could do better.

Perhaps you missed my challenge to all the liberals, from yesterday? Only RCV tried to defend the indefensible.

Here it is, again, if you think you're up to it?

b>ATTENTION ALL STINKING LIBERALS WHO INFEST THESE THREADS

Here is the video and transcript of the Appeaser-in-Chief's statement of September 12th, 2012, in the Rose Garden.

Now, stinking libs, here is your task:
Give me a quotation from the transcript, or, a time-stamp from the video, where O'Bama says the atrocity in Benghazi was the result of a terrorist attack.

All he keeps saying is "the attackers," or " these brutal acts," or "this attack," or "this type of senseless violence." He never mentions the word "terror" until the third from last paragraph, and, only once.

I love this stupid comment: "Today, the loss of these four Americans is fresh, but our memories of them linger on."

O'BAMA LIED LAST NIGHT. Period.

Nick| 10.18.12 @ 3:32PM

O'Bama is lying to your face, DRed, and you are saying, "Thank you, sir. May I have another?"

DRed| 10.18.12 @ 3:46PM

So it was an act of terror that wasn't the result of a terrorist attack? How does that work?

Here's what Obama said the day after his rose garden speech:

"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. "

Again, who are the people who commit acts of terror if not terrorists?

RAM| 10.18.12 @ 4:13PM

He parsed things so neatly as to not complete the loop. That is, he did not call this specific murder spree a terrorist act.

DRed| 10.18.12 @ 4:24PM

Right, he didn't call it a terrorist act. He called it an act of terror. What's the difference? Who commits acts of terror?

RCV| 10.18.12 @ 5:35PM

In fact Romney denied that the President called it "an act of terror".

Nick| 10.18.12 @ 6:16PM

And Mr. Romney was correct, RCV.

Nick| 10.18.12 @ 5:05PM

Boy, the democrat talking-points are out in force today. I've heard the "O'Bama said the day after his Rose Garden speech" meme from three different libs already.

Soooooo, on the morning of Wednesday, September 12th, 2012, the Appeaser-in-Chief clearly stated that the assassinations of Amb. Stevens, Sean Smith, Glen Doherty, and Tyrone Woods were the result of a terrorist attack.

Correct, DRed?

And, then, the Foodstamp President, and his surrogates, spent the NEXT TWO WEEKS saying it was a protest that got out of control, resulting in the mob killing of the four Americans, because of the stupid anti-Moslem video?

You libs boggle the mind.

What's the source for your bogus claim of "according to reporters who interviewed Benghazi residents"?
Since you are ignorant of the facts, let me enlighten you, okay?

On Monday, September 10th, 2012, Ayman al-Zawahiri called on Libyan's to avenge the death of Abu Yahya al-Libi, a fellow Libyan. This was the DAY BEFORE the anniversary of the attacks of September 11th.
Also, a State Department official testified (page 5) that she was following the attack "in almost real time," the night of the attack.

Yet, Team O'Bama kept insisting that the stupid video was to blame.
How do you look yourself in the mirror, DRed?

DRed| 10.18.12 @ 5:08PM

What's the difference between an act of terror and a terrorist act, Nick?

Nick| 10.18.12 @ 5:27PM

Why did Team O'Bama, FOR TWO WEEKS, blame the attack on a NON-EXISTENT MOB OF PROTESTERS, that DIDN'T GET OUT-OF-CONTROL like the one in Cairo, because of a STUPID anti-Moslem video, DRed?

O'Bama was not referring to the attack on Benghazi, in the Rose Garden speech. In the prior two paragraphs, he was talking about the anniversary of 9/11. That is where the "No [actsssss] of terror" phrase belongs.

Also, why was security REDUCED in Libya in the months leading up to the 9/11 anniversary? Why was the threat of Ayman al-Zawahiri, on September 10th, not headed?

Why don't you want to know the answers to these questions, DRed?

RCV| 10.18.12 @ 5:36PM

Nick can't answer the question Dred, because the attempt to distinquish between "an act of terror" and a "terrorist act" borders on the downright silly.

DRed| 10.18.12 @ 5:47PM

I just like watching him try to avoid acknowledging that.

CJW| 10.18.12 @ 6:10PM

What's the difference between an act of terror and a terrorist act, Nick?

You again are trying to be cute and Clintonian.

At no point in the transcript did Obama say the attack on Benghazi was a terrorrist attack or an act of terror. If he believed it was, then Obama would not say on Letterman, View, the UN apology, the Paki TV, and the road show by Rice and Carney, that the attack was a response to video.

If he believed it was a terrorrist attack or an act of terror, then why would he apologize? Why should we apologize is the muslims commit an act of terror or a terrorrist attack and kill four Americans?

You Dems are more interested in drinking the Obama kool aid than the truth of the incompetence of Obama that led to the death of four Americans, and the coverup for two weeks.

Now were are in CoverUp2 playing your semantic games to try to confuse the issue.

The issue is that Obama knew it was a terrorrist attack or act of terror but chose to describe it as a rection to a video, apologized for it, so that his incopentence in not providing security,and not reacting during the 6 hour attack would not be news.
Why did he lie if he knew it was an act of terror or terrorrist act and blame a video?

Nick| 10.18.12 @ 6:28PM

I'm the one who is providing facts, RCV & DRed.
You two CAN'T answer my questions.
All you have are your absurd defenses of O'Bama's lies and cover-up.

You two have become no better than Burp, Pelleas, and Jack'o Moscow.
Very sad.

I'll try one more time:
If the Appeaser-in-Chief was so sure that the murders of U.S. Ambassador Chris Stevens, Sean Smith, Glen Doherty, and Tyrone Woods at the Benghazi mission was the result of a terrorist attack, why did he, and the rest of Team O'Bama, spend the NEXT TWO WEEKS blaming their deaths on a NON-EXISTENT protest, that spiraled out-of-control because of the stupid video?

DRed| 10.18.12 @ 6:41PM

What's the difference between an act of terror and a terrorist attack, Nick?

Nick| 10.18.12 @ 7:24PM

Asked and answered, DRed.
How about answering my question, for a change?
Oh, that's right, you can't.

DRed| 10.18.12 @ 7:27PM

You haven't even tried to answer my question.

Nick| 10.18.12 @ 7:48PM

"You haven't even tried to answer my question."

Only to those who can't speak English.
____________________
Nick| 10.18.12 @ 5:27PM

O'Bama was not referring to the attack on Benghazi, in the Rose Garden speech. In the prior two paragraphs, he was talking about the anniversary of 9/11. That is where the "No [actsssss] of terror" phrase belongs.
_____________________

By the way, did you see how Romney/Ryan is UP BY SEVEN POINTS over O'Bama/Crowley in today's Gallop poll, DRed?
They've pulled even with women voters, too.
Ouch!

DRed| 10.18.12 @ 7:57PM

So you think acts of terror and terrorist acts are equivalent?

If he wasn't referring to the attack on Benghazi, why was this the very next sentence? "Today we mourn four more Americans who represent the very best of the United States of America. We will not waver in our commitment to see that justice is done for this terrible act. And make no mistake, justice will be done."

And why the next day did he say "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. "

So, you seem to admit that an act of terror is the same as a terrorist act. Obama said he was going to bring those responsible for killing the ambassador and the 3 other Americans to justice because no act of terror against us will go unpunished. That's pretty goddamn explicit, Nick. You and all your right wing media buddies are embarrassing yourselves on this one.

Nick| 10.18.12 @ 8:10PM

Why did the Appeaser-in-Chief leave the Rose Garden, jet off to Las Vegas for a fundraiser, and compare his supporters in attendance to the FOUR DEAD AMERICANS and those serving in Afghanistan, DRed?

Answer my question.

DRed| 10.18.12 @ 8:19PM

Wow-it's incredible how much wiggling and twisting you're doing to avoid admitting you, Mittens, and the entire right wing media complex have been lying about Obama's response. Keep on raising other issues, Nick. Maybe sometime I'll take the bait and you can slither away.

Nick| 10.18.12 @ 8:36PM

Answer my question, DRed.

DRed| 10.18.12 @ 8:43PM

Just admit you were wrong about Obama not calling it an act of terror and I'll answer any question you want.

CJW| 10.18.12 @ 9:52PM

Comrade DRed
Your question has been answered but you do not like the answer. You are a liar.
Answer this:

If Obama believed it was a terrorrist attack or an act of terror, then why did he apologize? Why should we apologize if the muslims commit an act of terror or a terrorrist attack and kill four Americans?

Nick| 10.18.12 @ 11:40PM

As you well know, DRed, I have no problem admitting when I'm wrong.
Unfortunately for you libs, and O'Bama/Crowley, I'm not wrong.

And, you're not answering my questions because you won't, you're not answering because you CAN'T.
Now, answer my question.

CJW| 10.18.12 @ 9:56PM

RCV
Since comrade dred cannot answer, maybe you can give it a whirl:

If Obama believed it was a terrorrist attack or an act of terror, then why did he apologize? Why should we apologize if the muslims commit an act of terror or a terrorrist attack and kill four Americans?

DRed| 10.18.12 @ 10:36PM

Apologize? I have no idea what you're talking about. Apologize to whom, and for what?

CJW| 10.18.12 @ 4:15PM

Nick,
Great work. The Obamdolts will believe whatever is the current story.
I believe Debbie now prefers Debbie Doberman Schulz.

Nick| 10.18.12 @ 5:09PM

Thanks, CJW.
And, fitting for DWS. She is definitely an attack-dog.
Albeit, totally toothless!

CJW| 10.18.12 @ 3:43PM

If he called it a terrorrst attack on Monday, then he must have had knowledge and a belief that it was a terrorrist attack on Benghazi that killed four Americans. If that is the case you are making, then you are admitting that he lied for two weeks by blaming the attack on demonstrations by muslims allegedly insulted by some video. It is inconsistent to call it a terrorrist attack which implies an planned attack, and also blame a video for spontaneous demonstrations for the hurt feelings of muslims insulted by the video. So which is it?

DRed| 10.18.12 @ 3:48PM

According to reporters who interviewed Benghazi residents, the terrorists who attacked the ambassador told them that they were doing so in response to that stupid video. Maybe that's true, maybe it's not. But it is possible that the video inspired the terrorists. The two things aren't somehow exclusive.

RAM| 10.18.12 @ 4:11PM

Are you naive enough to expect a terrorist, Al Qaeda or whatever, to give his real reasons to a reporter? Obama gave all terrorists a great excuse to throw back at us.

CJW| 10.18.12 @ 4:14PM

You have to be kidding. Pathetic. Not even Obama believes that.

DRed| 10.18.12 @ 4:24PM

No, I don't expect a violently murderous band of criminals to be forthright with random people on the street. That's why I wrote 'maybe it's true, maybe it's not'. What I don't understand is why you people think it's impossible for this to have been both a terrorist act and an act inspired, at least in some part, by that stupid video.

CJW| 10.18.12 @ 4:36PM

Because a terrorrist attack implies and requires some planning to assemble the holy warriors of Allah, obtain the weapons, scout the area, pick the best time and location, etc.

But Obama wanted yo to believe the peaceful muslims happened to turn on their computers, go to you tube for some approved entertainment, and lo and behold they see the propher Muhamed satirized, and then off they go to demonstrate in a fit of rage.

And a planned terrorrist attack is consistent with the two prior attacks in April and June 2012 before the video was even posted.

Come on DRed, just admit they lied, move on, they are not worthy of your support. Four Americans died and Axelrod mounts a political disinformation campaign for two weeks.

DRed| 10.18.12 @ 4:50PM

The people who carried out this attack are members of some sort of militia. I don't think it would have taken a lot of time to assemble them and get them weapons. They are members of an armed organization. So you're saying if they had decided to try to murder our ambassador only a day beforehand it wouldn't have been a terrorist attack? What would it have been?

CJW| 10.18.12 @ 5:00PM

You are not a serious person. Four Americans are dead, Obama lied, and you are trying to be cute.
Do you have any evidence that this militia the day before the attack was watching the video?
Get serious or get lost.

DRed| 10.18.12 @ 5:10PM

http://tinyurl.com/9vvlqla

Warning: it's a NY Times article, so you won't believe it.

Nick| 10.18.12 @ 6:15PM

The key quote:
"Libyan guards at the Benghazi compound and other witnesses told journalists working for The New York Times [...]."

Let me guess: Al Jazeera!

And, I'm shocked, SHOCKED, I TELL YOU!, that the New York Slimes found ONE GUY to quote, who claims the murderers were motivated by the stupid video.

Too bad Shrillary didn't get the memo in time. The article says that she said in a speech 10 days after the Benghazi attack that Al Qaeda in the Islamic Maghreb was involved.
(You'd have to have read the second page to see that, DRed.)

DRed| 10.18.12 @ 6:59PM

Your point being?

Nick| 10.18.12 @ 7:26PM

Which one, DRed?
Ever heard of specificity?

DRed| 10.18.12 @ 7:44PM

I didn't realize you had a single point, much less more than one.

Nick| 10.18.12 @ 7:50PM

Whaaaaaaaaaahhhhhhhhh!!!!!!!!

Did I hurt your widddle fweelings, DRed?

spike59| 10.18.12 @ 4:25PM

at least one the people who survived the attack who were asked in the hospital about the 'protest' replied "what protest?"

the attack had NOTHING to do with any stupid video that no one actually watched; it was in response to the drone-strike killing of Abu Yahya al-Libi , the Libyan-born Al-Qaeda second-in-command

PAD| 10.18.12 @ 3:29PM

Review of video from debate with comments is compelling. http://theconservativetreehous.....direction/

MTB| 10.18.12 @ 5:15PM

I was wondering the same thing. How did Obama know that Candy had any transcript at all, let alone "the transcript"? I don't recall a request for any other transcripts that night. This appears to be a preplanned setup between Obama and CNN, at least Candy Crowley. Oops!

rcrist247| 10.18.12 @ 5:43PM

The simple question I have ... If President Obama said that Benghazi was an act of error in the rose garden the day after the murder of Americans. Why didn't press persue that story for the American people? Please ask Candy Crowley.

Vance P. Frickey| 10.18.12 @ 6:19PM

I'm not particularly surprised that the establishment press would step in and help Obama "win" a debate. They inflicted him on us in the first place.

Nick| 10.18.12 @ 7:22PM

Here are all the comments that the Foodstamp President made in the Rose Garden on September 12th, 2012, that referred to the terrorist attack in Benghazi the previous night:

"Yesterday, four of these extraordinary Americans were killed in an attack on our diplomatic post in Benghazi."
[No mention of a terror attack.]

"The United States condemns in the strongest terms this outrageous and shocking attack."
[No mention of a terror attack.]

"And make no mistake, we will work with the Libyan government to bring to justice the killers who attacked our people."
[No mention of terrorists.]

"We reject all efforts to denigrate the religious beliefs of others."
[Another apology for our American free-speech rights. And, another sop to the "religion of peace."]

"But there is absolutely no justification to this type of senseless violence. None."
[Blaming the stupid video, by implying that this was a case of Jihadis Gone Wild.]

"Already, many Libyans have joined us in doing so, and this attack will not break the bonds between the United States and Libya."
[No mention of a terror attack.]

"Libyan security personnel fought back against the attackers alongside Americans."
[No mention of terrorists.]

"We will not waver in our commitment to see that justice is done for this terrible act."
[Two sentences AFTER the "No acts of terror" comment.]

Nick| 10.18.12 @ 7:23PM

Continued....

"But we also know that the lives these Americans led stand in stark contrast to those of their attackers."
[No mention of terrorists.]

DRed| 10.18.12 @ 7:43PM

Well, golly Nick, his speech sure doesn't mention anything about terrorism when you cut out the part where he talks about acts of terror. haha. You are becoming pathetically unhinged on this one.

Nick| 10.18.12 @ 7:54PM

You really need to stop projecting, DRed.

And, answer my question.
Why did Team O'Bama keep insisting FOR TWO WEEKS that it was a mob of protesters, angered about the stupid video, who were responsible for the murders U.S. Ambassador Chris Stevens, consular official Sean Smith, and former Navy SEALs/private security contractors Glen Doherty and Tyrone Woods.

You bleeding heart libs won't even say their names.
How pathetic.

Nick| 10.18.12 @ 7:58PM

Have you even listened to the Appeaser-in-Chief's Rose Garden speech, from September 12th, 2012?

"Of course, yesterday was already a painful day for our nation as we marked the solemn memory of the 9/11 attacks. We mourned with the families who were lost on that day. I visited the graves of troops who made the ultimate sacrifice in Iraq and Afghanistan at the hallowed grounds of Arlington Cemetery, and had the opportunity to say thank you and visit some of our wounded warriors at Walter Reed. And then last night, we learned the news of this attack in Benghazi.

"As Americans, let us never, ever forget that our freedom is only sustained because there are people who are willing to fight for it, to stand up for it, and in some cases, lay down their lives for it. Our country is only as strong as the character of our people and the service of those both civilian and military who represent us around the globe. 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."

The Foodstamp President was talking about the "memory of the 9/11 attacks," not the attack on the Benghazi mission. Ergo, he is lying.

And, you are O'Bama's dupe, DRed.

DRed| 10.18.12 @ 9:01PM

And then last night, we learned the news of this attack in Benghazi.

"As Americans, let us never, ever forget that our freedom is only sustained because there are people who are willing to fight for it, to stand up for it, and in some cases, lay down their lives for it. Our country is only as strong as the character of our people and the service of those both civilian and military who represent us around the globe. 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. We will not waver in our commitment to see that justice is done for this terrible act. And make no mistake, justice will be done.

How much more bullshit are you going to spew? That's someone talking about the memory of the 9/11 attacks? In a press conference specifically called to discuss the Benghazi attacks?

CJW| 10.18.12 @ 9:54PM

If Obama believed it was a terrorrist attack or an act of terror, then why did he apologize? Why should we apologize if the muslims commit an act of terror or a terrorrist attack and kill four Americans

Nick| 10.18.12 @ 11:54PM

If you listen to the speech, instead of reading the White House version of it, you will hear that the "Today we mourn four more Americans" is the beginning of a new paragraph. The "No [actsssss] of terror" sentence belongs to the previous paragraph. Because it speaks of actsssss. Plural. As in not one.
So, how can it apply to the attack on the Benghazi mission and the murders of FOUR AMERICANS?

You have spent the better part of day attempting, and failing, badly, to defend the lies & cover-up of Team O'Bama/Crowley.
It is still dominating the news cycles.
This is not good for the Foodstamp President.

But, don't worry, DRed.
Those zingers about "binders" & Big Bird are sure to stop the O'Bama/Crowley campaign's hemorrhaging....NOT!

Nick| 10.18.12 @ 8:35PM

***MORE BAD NEWS FOR TEAM O'BAMA/CROWLEY***

Michigan and Pennsylvania are now TOSS-UP STATES!!!!
Colorado and North Carolina are now ROMNEY/RYAN STATES!!!!
O'Bama/Crowley are PULLING MONEY out of Florida & Virginia!!!!

Meanwhile....

O'Bama has his "Binders" zinger.
Oh, and Big Bird.
What an incompetent boob!

jp2feminist| 10.21.12 @ 11:14PM

When Obama said "Proceed," you could tell it through Romney. What a bizarre response! Almost like he was ready for what was about to happen. And when he blurted out, "Get the transcript, Candy", it was like he could barely contain himself. Obama AND Crowley were ready for Mitt's accusation, and I wonder how the woman sleeps at night. Clearly she was bullied into it. I first became suspicious when Greta interviewed the questioner, Kerry Ladkas (sp?). Something about him did not seem right, and I wish someone would dig further into his background. I fear he was a plant.

jp2feminist| 10.21.12 @ 11:15PM

I meant "threw" not "through". It is late. . . .

More Blog Posts by Jeffrey Lord

http://spectator.org/blog/2012/10/18/the-candy-obama-controversy-ge

ADVERTISEMENT

The Spectacle Blog

Harry Reid Pushes for the Nuclear Option

Claire Healey | 1:11PM

Weiner: More Photos of My Junk Might Surface

Kyle Peterson | 12:55PM

#FreeKate? Movement to Normalize Pedophilia Finds Its Poster Girl

Robert Stacy McCain | 10:09AM

Morning Round-Up 5-23

Patrick Ryan | 10:06AM

I Agree With Andy McCarthy: No Special Counsel

Ross Kaminsky | 9:16AM

Sorry, You Can’t Delegate Responsibility

Ray V. Hartwell, III | 9:10AM

Issa Recovers

Ross Kaminsky | 5.22.13

The Religion of Peace Strikes London Again

Aaron Goldstein | 5.22.13

Latest Headlines

The Inoperative Jay Carney

Jeffrey Lord|77 comments

Lerner’s Plea

Ray V. Hartwell, III|83 comments

Eugenic Abortion 2.0

Daniel Allott|36 comments

Holding AWOL Obama Accountable

Betsy McCaughey|15 comments

What Are the Risks of Syria Involvement?

Christopher Orlet|15 comments

Obama’s Imbroglios

R. Emmett Tyrrell, Jr.|26 comments

Obama’s Drone War

Jed Babbin|13 comments

Catholic Culture In America

G. Tracy Mehan, III|20 comments

SPONSORED LINKS

FLASHBACK TO: 1995

Clip of the Day

Most Popular Articles

Obama and the IRS: The Smoking Gun?

Jeffrey Lord | 5.20.13

Time to Go for the Kill

Peter Ferrara | 5.22.13

From the Obama Ministry of Truth

Ben Stein | 5.21.13

IRS Union Chief Stonewalls

Jeffrey Lord | 5.21.13

Wimps Versus Barbarians

Thomas Sowell | 5.21.13

Despite the WaPost, Benghazi Is a Major Scandal

Quin Hillyer | 5.21.13

Damage Control for Dummies

Matt Purple | 5.22.13

Anyone Still Believe Me?

Aaron Goldstein | 5.21.13

ADVERTISEMENT

Home |About |Contributors |Advertise |Donate |Privacy Policy |Contact

The American Spectator Foundation is the 501(c)(3) organization responsible for publishing The American Spectator magazine and training aspiring journalists who espouse traditional American values. Your contributions are tax deductible to the extent permitted by law. Each donor receives a year-end summary of their giving for tax purposes.

Copyright 2013, The American Spectator. All rights reserved.