"Is the Libya scandal as big as Watergate?"

I'm just sitting here eating my popcorn and watching the Obamaoist and Clintonista camps duke it out over who is to blame.

I'm encouraged by the fact that the State Department mandarins are pointing their fingers up the chain of command. Clearly, they feel there is no reason to lie to save Hillary's bacon, which I interpret to mean that they believe the USA will be under new management on Nov 7th.

You know, I am beginning to wonder if Obama's disastrous performance in the debate isn't related to this in at least a big way. See how absoutley deflated he was? He knows what is coming. Even if he wins the election, he has the next four years of internecine civil war that is about to break out in the Democratic Party to look forward to as everyone starts scrambling for cover, pointing fingers, and ratting each other out. There is NO way Obama is going to let himself go down for this as a final cap to one of the worst performances as POTUS ever. And Hillary Clinton will certainly not take the fall. Watch for Obama to oust her as SOS. Then watch as the Clintons stage a guerilla war. And Bidin trying to blame the intelligence community? Watch those roosters come home to roost, too.

A week after the incident the Administration was still trotting out the ridiculous farce about some half baked video.

Of course this ignores more than 230 violent incidents logged over the previous 11 months, with 30 around Benghazi. Notably, the British Ambassador was attacked and the British had an MOU to leave their vehicles in the American compound as they were the last western flag in Benghazi.

The State Dept clearly dropped the ball and possibly the White House dropped the ball. Let the 'buck stop' where it well and truly deserves.

The Administration is playing the 'obfuscate and distract' game; but any thinking observer would see this for what it is: The Administration engaged in 'supervised neglect' and is now desperately trying to shovel this pile of camel dung onto the nearest scapegoat at hand, hoping that the malodorous wafts will dissipate before election day.

Cheers

Hans Rupprecht, Commander in Chief

1st Saint Nicolaas Army
Army Group “True North”

Watch for the Energizer Bunny to show up at the next debate.

I hate to break this to you, Al_in_Ottawa, but the USA will NOT be "under new management" on Nov 7th as you posit. Even if Mittens should win the election in spite of the massive vote fraud that is already underway, the inauguration is NOT until 20 January. Much mischief can be made before then, especially by those who no longer care about what Mere Citizens think of them. And since the GOP is run by gutless wonders such as "Weepy" and Mitch, I doubt they are worried much about Congress doing anything either. And in light of the fact that "Law Enforcement" has consistently looked the other way as this Administration continues its felonies and treason...

Now footbert, Ms. Crowley is more akin to a cow than a bunny. Maybe you were thinking about Miss Piggy instead?

Obama has and has always had only one focus: Himself. Not others, not America, not Americans. Himself.

He is currently focused on his re-election. Part of his self-authored description of Himself is that HE vanquished Al Qaeda. Terrorism no longer exists; it's either 'man-caused disasters' or 'workplace violence' or caused by the intolerant Americans.

He, Obama The Great, killed Bin Laden. Obama ignores the decade of intelligence work to find Bin Laden and the Seals who did the actual kill; he ignores that he dithered for weeks on whether to OK the order. Obama The Great Ignorant One also ignores that Al Qaeda doesn't operate with a Commander in Chief. Bin Laden's death is irrelevant to the operations of Islamic fascism which doesn't function via a central command but via vast spreading local self-run networks.

But a key factor in Obama's election campaign, since he can't run on domestic policies, is that he has nullified Islamic terrorism, both in word use and in fact. Wrong. It's alive and well and increasing - but Obama is desperate to hide this fact.

So, he'll claim Benghazi was due to an American made video, which it wasn't; and then, he'll claim that blaming the video was due to the Secretary of State, or, via Biden, due to the poor Intelligence reports. Nope...even if Obama rarely attends these daily Intelligence Reports, facts are facts. It was a terrorist attack and Al Qaeda is very much alive and thriving.

Now, will Hillary allow Obama to shift the blame to her, or will she fling it back, and risk imploding the whole Democratic Party? Or will she wait until she is certain Obama will lose, and then, will she fight back?

It is not as big as Watergate. It is much, much bigger. Obama lied-people died.

Delightful description there ET...

But this video accurately shows what the Administration is doing...

Cowboys Herding Cats

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Pk7yqlTMvp8

Cheers

Hans Rupprecht, Commander in Chief

1st Saint Nicolaas Army
Army Group “True North”

There is another component to this Libya affair that the internal finger-pointing and MSM is distracting us from. Could it be the state dept. left the diplomat hang out to dry hoping an attack on him would provide a justification to go into Libya and save the sagging Dem fortunes in the November election? See how the MSM is stage handing the event, not blaming the white house, but scapegoating Hillary and other faceless bureaucrats. Eventually we will hear the administration say they down played the incident to avoid retaliatory factions, but now they can’t be controlled and they will have to intervene. Obama needs a crisis to prop up his numbers

As a side note to the dirty commie street politics this regime engages in, having seen the latest poling numbers favoring the GOP, please note that the Dem backup plan is in full swing as the Dems mobilize the race card in getting their Obamessiha acolytes to make a massive Facebook and twitter campaign of promising to riot if Obama loses – a tactic used by his Kenyan cousin he intended employ if he lost the election.

Put nothing past this Stalinesque regime to hold onto power.

It's Romneys fault, Axegrinder said so.

Move along, nothing to see here.

/sarc

Occam - I see your points but I'm not sure how strong they are.

First, I agree that Obama wanted some 'October crisis' to galvanize support for him, but I don't think that going into Libya would do it. After all, if that were the agenda, he could have made the case to go in NOW, to avenge the Ambassador's death. But those deaths were irrelevant to him; he missed the Intelligence briefing the next day and instead flew to Las Vegas for yet another campaign event.

And if his foreign policy claim is that he vanquished Al Qaeda, then, to admit its resurgence as an October Surprise would negate his claim.

As for the riots if he loses, I don't think people will either take that threat seriously or even, put up with such a threat.

Furthermore, to split the Democratic Party as he is now doing, is hardly a constructive tactic; there are still massive numbers of Democrats who support Hillary, and don't take kindly to the Obama team's actions against her.

Nixon's cover-up was never aided by the media.

LAS, exactly.

Hans, "The State Dept clearly dropped the ball and possibly the White House dropped the ball. Let the 'buck stop' where it well and truly deserves." Well said.

Hopefully Benghazigate blows up in both the Marxist-in-Chief and Hillary's face and takes them both down.

Michael Harkov said: "You know, I am beginning to wonder if Obama's disastrous performance in the debate isn't related to this in at least a big way."

There's more than Benghazi in the wind for Barry. There's a donor scandal still hanging fire, there's Fast&Furious unresolved, and there is the polling data on how the House and Senate are going to go this year. Republican.

I think Barry looks like a guy who knows there's a bunch of skeletons fighting to get out of his closet. He knows his own party is going to turn on him like a pack of dogs. He knows he's going to get IMPEACHED for sure over Fast & Furious and/or Benghazi, and there will be no DemocRat Senate to save him like they did with Clinton.

Frankly he looks like a spiteful pr1ck who's going through the motions fueled by pure 110 octane hubris with a nitrous shot of hate.

And as somebody said above, the November-January lame duck session is going to be really something.

I don't think either Obama or the Clintons care what happens to the party as long as they get what they want above all else: power. Apres moi la deluge!

As to what can happen to the State Dept. employees for speaking the truth, I believe that a)it takes forever to fire a government employee b)they would have ample grounds for a wrongful dismissal lawsuit, with a book deal thrown in for good measure
c)after Nov 6th, this will be a lame duck government

Speaking of what will happen when Obama loses, who do you think he will grant Presidential pardons to?

And as somebody said above, the November-January lame duck session is going to be really something.

Speaking of hubris...

Obama's ground-game is still dominating Romney's. Outside the debate, Romney is insipid. He's actually berating Obama for not being more interested in trade war in China. Bad policy and bad politics. What a fool.

when Obama loses, who do you think he will grant Presidential pardons to?

Himself, to start with.

For the past year there's been plenty of us that have said B. Hussien's lame duck session is going to bring shock and awe to those that value the Constitution.

Waivers for all my friends. Presidential pardons for those involved too much with the Benghazi affair, with Fast and Furious gunrunning, with hiding the trail for B. Hussien's foreign funds for the election campaign. After all, B. Hussien won't have any skin in that game.

Recall that G.W. Bush refused to pardon Scooter Libby? ... B. Hussien won't hold back.

Obama has been a disaster, we saw the real deal in the first debate.

What's really dumbfounding is the fact polls are showing he and Romney so close.

Is it down to the media skewing and hiding the facts resulting in an uninformed electorate, or, is it a very stupid electorate?

The Libya scandal is bigger than Watergate. Can anyone imagine the din if this had happened under George W Bush?

Can the President pardon himself? Yup, I think it's relevant.

It seems that if he does before he's impeached, it's going to be valid. The Constitution doesn't say he can't. The lawyer / author here didn't get into it over the Supreme Court having a different opinion, except that it would likely end up there. The current office holder, being full of "Me, myself and I" seems to be a perfect candidate to test this theory.

http://www.concurringopinions.com/archives/2008/12/can_the_preside.html

Liz

Much like Canaduh, its a very stupid and uninformed electorate, especially the black community, sorry to say, that is 97% voting for Obamao, strictly because he's one of them, no other reason required

'What's really dumbfounding is the fact polls are showing he and Romney so close. '

They are 'close' Liz J; on almost every policy that matters to the American people. Both support NDAA, TSA, The Fed, Robamnycare, starting foreign wars to profit the Military complex, immigration, taxes, printing fiat money.....they have the same backers (Goldman Sacks, G.E. greenees in the wind/sun business, big pharma (via obamney care)...

The repubs chose a 0 clone to run against the 'present' stranger (he still has not rounded up a birth certificate) occupying the White House. The challanger, if he had anything going for him but his hairdo would be miles ahead. Did the Repubs choose to lose? They had a true Patriot in the stable who ran ahead in the race but they (Rom, msm and the Repubs) crushed that man and his supporters.

As for Libya, it is just a ploy to keep American voters occupied so they won't ask questions about things that matter, IMO.

As Mark commented, what mischief can be done by Obama and company between Nov & Jan. That is as scary a thought as Obama for four more years. If all he did was pardon a bunch of like minded lackies that would be mild. As someone suggested the Constitution may be in for a dose of Shock & Awe and this I fear may be closer to the truth. He has already proven capable of getting his way behind the backs of the elected representatives and the extent of the damage he does may not even be fully apparent till well after Rommney takes the reigns.

Here in Canuck land we are used to new lefty governments suddenly claiming that the previous government had hidden how bad things were but Romney may bring new meaning to this idea.

And I don't trust Madam Clinton, now or in the future, anymore then I trust the Dear Leader.

Things must be getting tense! FLOTUS telling voters to 'tell the knuckleheads to vote!'..see http://t.co/dUzxuyW2
One commenter says,'you gotta be a knucklehead to vote Obama1'

Not only is 'bama's State Dep't responsible for the deaths in Benghazi by negligence of ommission, by perpetrating that Great Lie, it bears culpability for all the post-Benghazi deaths that happened when the rabid rabble hit the streets in response to that claim.

I mean, if Jughead and No-head say it's so....it must be so.

Ulaulaulaulaulaulaula! Death to Great Satan...

A week after the incident the Administration was still trotting out the ridiculous farce about some half baked video.
~Hans 12:02 PM

Not half baked, the video was made to serve the purpose it did.
Walid Shoebat exposes the "Innocence of Muslims" video as a terrorist production along the same lines as the Muhammad Al Dura scheme.

http://www.shoebat.com/2012/09/27/innocence-of-muslims-film-was-made-by-terrorists-2/

SAMPLE:
"So lets examine facts instead of the filmmaker’s fiction.

Court documents reveal that Nakoula Bacile Nakoula, producer of the movie Innocence of Muslims, partnered in a scheme with Eiad Salameh, my(Walid Shoebat's) first cousin.(bolded in original)

Eiad is a Muslim terror supporter and is not an Egyptian Copt".
~Walid Shoebat

Breaking news: Hilary IS taking the fall for Libya.Just heard on both Fox/CNN that she did interviews,and said the 'buck stops with her.'

LAS, you were correct about the Watergate remark but Romney is on-task when he points out that Obama DOES benefit from dealings with China:

http://iowntheworld.com/blog/?p=153767

What Romney should be doing (and I hope he hammers Obama with this tomorrow) is remind the electorate that White House and the State Department knew the concerns of embassy workers, that the attack had NOTHING to do with a video, that they still covered it up and went out of their way to distract voters from this (a la Big Bird).