Subscribe to

Consider This

in Apple Podcasts

Apple Podcasts

in Google Podcasts

Google Podcasts

in Stitcher

Stitcher SmartRadio

on Android

Subscribe on Android

or the “podcatcher”
of your choice

RSS

Benghazi Attack Archives

Scandal-free? Not so much, actually.

President Obama and many of his supporters have been characterizing his administration as “scandal free”. Really? Something tells me their definition of “scandal” changes based on who’s occupying the Oval Office. Let’s run down a few examples of things that would have dogged a Republican.

And we have some feedback by listener DocH regarding who the extremists really are. (Hint: There are not as many of them as you may think.)

Mentioned links:

Celebrities Walk Back Their Promises To Leave The Country If Trump Is Elected

18 Major Scandals in Obama’s ‘Scandal-Free’ Presidency

‘An amazingly scandal-free administration’

Read the rest of this entry

Episode 156: Thoughts on a Debate, Part 2

The first Trump/Clinton debate

The first Trump/Clinton debate

This is the second part of my analysis of the September 26th debate between presidential candidates Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump. As I wrote last time, there was just so much to get into (because we finally got to compare the candidates side-by-side) that I couldn’t fit it all into one episode.

And with the next debate between them coming very soon, I had to get this out before that, which is why you’re getting 2 episodes in one week. But hey, it’s just 10 minutes! 🙂

And you should probably listen to part 1 first. Click here for the audio and the transcript.

Mentioned links:

The first Trump-Clinton presidential debate transcript, annotated

Economic assistance to countries in the Middle East and North Africa

Read the rest of this entry

Benghazi: Smoking Gun, or All Smoke?

Busy times, both at work and at home, have given me little time to prepare something for the podcast, so I’m going to throw a blog post out here. If you have any ideas for what you’d like me to cover, comment on this post, write me a considerthis@ctpodcasting.com, or call me at 267-CALL-CT-0 (267-225-5280).


What about Benghazi? (ABC News)

What about Benghazi? (ABC News)

When the latest memo to come out of the Benghazi investigation came out…

OK, let me back up. Actually, the memo was never given to the Congressional investigation. It took a Freedom of Information Act lawsuit by Judicial Watch for this memo to come out. So for starters, it really looks like the administration did not want this out in public.

The thrust of the message was clear: Protect Obama’s image (and re-election efforts) at all costs; American interests and the American public’s right to know be damned. It contained four bullet points:

–”To convey that the United States is doing everything that we can to protect our people and facilities abroad;

–”To underscore that these protests are rooted in an Internet video, and not a broader failure of policy;

–”To show that we will be resolute in bringing people who harm Americans to justice, and standing steadfast through these protests;

–”To reinforce the President and Administration’s strength and steadiness in dealing with difficult challenges.”

Remember, this all happened in the heat of the President’s re-election campaign. As to the bullet points, we now know that the US was not doing everything it could to protect the consulate, the protest were not rotted in an Internet video (and the administration knew that almost immediately after the incident), we did not bring anyone to justice (not even now, 20 months after the incident), which goes to show that the President and the Administration do not have strength and steadiness in dealing with difficult challenges.

But the kiester-covering was in full swing and scapegoats were worth their weight in gold.

In his congressional testimony, former CIA Deputy Director Michael Morell said that then-U.N. Ambassador Susan Rice is the one who linked the video to the Benghazi attacks but that the video was not part of the CIA analysis. In other words, the administration made it up out of whole cloth to deflect blame for its policy failures in relaxing the war on terror…

Indeed, the day after the event:

An email on Sept. 12, 2012, to Rice from Payton Knopf, deputy spokesman at the U.S. Mission to the United Nations, confirmed the attacks were “planned in advance” and “complex,” not spontaneous in reaction to a video.

Poor Jay Carney had the unenviable job of trying to deny that these memos had anything to do with Benghazi, even though they were provided due to a FOIA request about…Benghazi.

The fact that they, indeed, speak to the Benghazi issues specifically, but the administration hung on to these memos and did not give them to Darrell Issa and the committee, shows just how revealing they are.

But only now are the mainstream media noticing this story. The Benghazi hearings have been pitifully covered. The idea that this has been a “Fox News story” (as though they made it up) only came because they gave it the coverage it deserved, while the rest of the media sat on its collective hands. Now, even ABC news reporters found themselves amazed at the stonewalling and dissembling.

But even with that, ABC has been very reluctant to report on it. Even the President has called out Fox on this — no other network — so you know it’s been getting short shrift elsewhere. And at other networks, without coming out directly and saying it, the news executives suddenly wouldn’t find time to report on it.

Yes, the daily interviews from the committee can be yawners, and it’s not always breaking news. That much is true. But it’s also true that the latest revelations are news, and even that is getting reported primarily by Fox.

Oh, and MSNBC? Yeah, never mind about them. If it doesn’t have a link to Chris Christie and “Bridgegate” (where nobody died), they don’t care much about it.

This is important. If you news outlet isn’t covering it, you may need to switch sources.

How could conservative groups be targeted for unfair treatment at the Environmental Protection Agency? I couldn’t quite understand that when I first heard of it, but indeed the EPA was able to do just that.

Liberals have been lifted by the news that groups with the words “progressive” or “occupy” were also targeted at the IRS. However, the level of scrutiny they received was an order of magnitude easier than it was for conservative groups. Listen in to see…er…hear the difference.

With all the scandals going on these days, the cable news networks have seen some changes in their viewership numbers. But for one network, that’s not good news. Care to guess which one?

Mentioned links:

TVTalk show for “Under the Dome”

EPA stonewalled records requests by Republican-led states

Twelve different IRS units nationwide targeted conservatives

‘Lookout List’ Not Much Broader Than Originally Thought, Contrary to Reports

TV Ratings: MSNBC Falls Below HLN in May, Rachel Maddow Hits Lows

Read the rest of this entry

The New Yorker magazine said this recently about the Benghazi issue: ““For a long time, it seemed like the idea of a coverup was just a Republican obsession. But now there is something to it.” No, there was always something to it. It’s just now been demonstrated to the media. Those hearings that were supposedly a waste of time have had certain educational benefits, not the least of which was the allegedly independent and adversarial press that’s supposed to look into these things themselves.

But now, liberal pundits are trying to minimize the damage by painting opposition as purely partisan. They’ve come up with what I call “drive-by graphics” that draw totally unrelated parallels and ask why Republicans weren’t outraged over them. Apple, meet orange.

The IRS got caught giving extra scrutiny to conservative groups, from Tea Partiers to Billy Graham to pro-lifers. But the internal investigation was a sham, and, while the IRS has apologized, just try doing that to get out of your next audit.

And finally, I give a few thoughts worth considering about the Kermit Gosnell trial’s guilty verdicts.

Mentioned links:

The Damning Dozen: Twelve Revelations from the Benghazi Hearings

7 Things We Learned from the Benghazi Whistleblower Hearing

The IRS admits to ‘targeting’ conservative groups, but were they also ‘leaking’?

Inspector General finds a confused, mismanaged IRS

Last Year, Media Ridiculed Claims IRS Targeted Conservatives

IRS DEMANDED TEA PARTY READING LISTS, FACEBOOK POSTS

Tea Party Patriots, others still waiting for IRS tax-exempt decision

IRS APOLOGIZES FOR TARGETING TEA PARTY GROUPS

CLAIM: OBAMA CAMPAIGN CO-CHAIR ATTACKED ROMNEY WITH LEAKED IRS DOCS

Read the rest of this entry