Krauthammer: Obama administration suppressing truth on Benghazi

Krauthammer: Obama admin. suppressing truth on Benghazi
Published May 09, 2013 | O’Reilly Factor | Bill O’Reilly
With: Charles Krauthammer

This is a RUSH transcript from “The O’Reilly Factor,” May 9, 2013. This copy may not be in its final form and may be updated.

Watch “The O’Reilly Factor” weeknights at 8 p.m. and 11 p.m. ET!
O’REILLY: “Back of the Book” segment tonight. As we discussed in the “Talking Points Memo,” the Benghazi, Libya story is very important because there may be a misconduct, misconduct by the federal government, on a high level.

However, democrats, they don’t want to know about it. And joining us now from Washington, Fox News Political Analyst, Charles Krauthammer.

You know, I’m trying to be fair on this. I’m trying to be fair on this story. I don’t want to be perceived as somebody who is trying to get Hillary Clinton or get President Obama.

But the thing that really, really annoyed me was Hicks, when he said that he was demoted for, pretty much, telling the truth.

And Hillary Clinton had to sign off on that. That — that’s — that really got me. And you say.

CHARLES KRAUTHAMMER, FOX NEWS POLITICAL ANALYST: That’s the heart of the story. That’s why the story changed yesterday.

This story isn’t going to explode. This is a drip, drip, drip. And what the drip, drip, drip is about is this, the administration tried to suppress the truth about what happened in Benghazi.

And did that consistently and deliberately while the president, at the same time, said publicly that his only objective was to collect the facts and to share them, as they received them, with the American people.

Every piece of evidence that we heard yesterday contradicted that. Now, this is not a hanging offense, it’s not a jailing offense, it’s not a break-in, it’s not a burglary.

It is an administration trying to cover up what was not a criminal act, there could have been misjudgments, and there were, but there was a lot of human error.

You can have some sympathy. They might have made the wrong judgment about to rescue or not. You have to balance it left and right.

So, it was not that great, I mean, a crime. But they decided, in the middle of an election, where the president had proclaimed, “al-Qaeda is gone and conquered all this. The war on terror is over. I’m a big hero. Osama is slain. G.M. is alive and Osama is dead.”

In the middle of a campaign where they’re pushing this, they decided to maintain that line. They would suppress the truth.

They would demote a hero like Hicks. They would shout at him. They would threaten him. They would not allow him to meet with the Congressional delegation. All of these things are part of a cover-up.

O’REILLY: And it’s because of the election. It’s a — you know, and we have to refresh people’s memories a little bit. The Watergate scandal was because of the election. Richard Nixon wanted to know —

KRAUTHAMMER: Exactly.

O’REILLY: — what his opponent was doing, so they broke into the headquarters to try to figure that out. So, this is the same thing. They don’t want the narrative that the terror warrior — Barack Obama had a slip-up in Libya.

They didn’t want that to be part of the election campaign. That’s what it’s all about.

KRAUTHAMMER: Look, but that’s the great irony of it. It wasn’t as if Obama ordered a burglary or a criminal act, or had a plumber seal it or hide any of this.

It was simply to make him — look, I have to speculate because why else would you have the Assistant Secretary of State for Near Eastern Affairs write a memo the day after the attack saying, “It was an attack by Ansar al-Sharia, the al-Qaeda affiliate.”

So, State Department admits it on day two. CIA submits evidence, its evidence on day four that it’s all about a terror attack. There is no speculation about a video.

There was no demonstration. Why else would you create a false story that you announced on the five networks. I mean, there is no plausible reason.

O’REILLY: Is it beyond reasonable —

KRAUTHAMMER: The only possible reason is that they were trying to look politically-good —

O’REILLY: Yes. They didn’t want to give the republicans a hammer to go after them because, as you know, Romney came out the day after the attack.

KRAUTHAMMER: But it’s so disproportionate. It makes no sense. Admit there were some mistakes.

O’REILLY: Of course.

KRAUTHAMMER: Americans are forgiving.

O’REILLY: In this climate, 24/7 news, how do you think you’re going to cover something like that up. Come on.

But is it possible that this was done at a level — I don’t think it’s possible in the State Department. I think that Hillary Clinton had to know that Hicks was, you know, in their — he was off the reservation. That’s the term they used.

She had to know that. And she was OK with the demotion, which is ridiculous.

But at the White House level, it could have been guys in the campaign. I mean, we have to give the benefit of the doubt here right now, do we not.

KRAUTHAMMER: It wasn’t the members of the campaign who doctored the talking points. I’m not saying Obama sat down and he edited them.

But the story that Jay Carney has told, that the only thing that was done by the political people on the talking points was to change one word, I think “embassy” into “facility” or something, is ridiculous. We know what happened in the e-mail.

O’REILLY: I wonder who did that. I wonder who actually sat down and changed that.

KRAUTHAMMER: The story they have put out, Jay Carney has said, “This is the administration’s story. We initially assumed or thought, the evidence was, it was a demonstration, not in the video. And as we learned the new evidence, it became a terror attack.”

That is completely false. They knew in the State Department, in CIA, everywhere. As Hicks had said, “There was no demonstration.”

 

Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/on-air/oreilly/2013/05/10/krauthammer-obama-admin-suppressing-truth-benghazi#ixzz2T0GBN9Ow

CBS Anchor: “We are getting big stories wrong, over and over again.”

[Unfortunately, he doesn’t know how wrong he is. The mainstream media refuses to consider even the possibility of false flag terrorism. — Ed.]

CBS Anchor: ‘We Are Getting Big Stories Wrong, Over and Over Again’

“Our house is on fire.”

12:09 PM, MAY 11, 2013 • BY DANIEL HALPER

CBS anchor Scott Pelley said at a speech at Quinnipiac University that journalists “are getting big stories wrong, over and over again.”

 

“Our house is on fire,” said Pelley. The video of Pelley’s speech is courtesy of nowthisnews.com.

“These have been a bad few months for journalism,” he added. “We’re getting the big stories wrong, over and over again.”

The CBS newsreader was quick to take at least partial blame. “Let me take the first arrow: During our coverage of Newtown, I sat on my set and I reported that Nancy Lanza was a teacher at the school. And that her son had attacked her classroom. It’s a hell of a story, but it was dead wrong. Now, I was the managing editor, I made the decision to go ahead with that and I did, and that’s what I said, and I was absolutely wrong. So let me just take the first arrow here.”

And Pelley said the republic relies on the quality of the news business. “Democracies succeed or fail based on their journalism,” said Pelley. “America is strong because its journalism is strong. That’s how democracies work. They’re only as good as the quality of the information that the public possesses. And that is where we come in.”

Class Assignment

Read the Communist Manifesto and Saul Alinsky’s Rules for Radicals. Compare and contrast the doctrines and principles in those books to the American tradition of free enterprise, the Constitution, and the Bill of Rights. Compare and contrast the doctrines and principles in those books to actions taken by the Obama campaigns and his Administration. Page limit: 5-10 pages. Due in one week.

 

Bilderberg 2013 Secret Location Uncovered?

Bilderberg 2013 Secret Location Uncovered?

Will the secretive Bilderberg Group meet in the United States for an unprecedented second year running or is Europe their most likely destination?

Bilderberg May Meet in Virginia, Again• Bilderberg group thinks ignorant America a better place to meet than informed Europe

By James P. Tucker Jr.

There is strong evidence that Bilderberg will return to Chantilly, Virginia for its annual closed meeting June 22-24, 2013 at the posh Westfields Marriott near the Dulles Airport. Westfields is booked up for that weekend and individuals are unable to make a one-room reservation, even five months in advance.

Bilderberg has been called the most exclusive and secretive club in the world. To be admitted, you have to own a multinational bank, a multinational corporation or a country. Since its first meeting in 1954, it has beenattended by the top power-brokers, financial minds and world leaders.

Organizers require that no one other than participants and staff assistants be inside or on the grounds of the resort when Bilderberg meets. The hotel staff is limited and sworn to secrecy. They reimburse the costs of local and state police patrolling outside the walls and have their own army of security inside, both uniformed and in plain clothes.

Bilderberg boys have been confronted by The Spotlight and AMERICAN FREE PRESS at every meeting for more than 30 years. During that time, the news media in Europe and America have joined in the coverage—except for The Washington PostNew York Times and Los Angeles Times, which are participants and maintain their Bilderberg vows of secrecy. Bilderberg was covered extensively near Washington last year for the first time. But the convenience of Dulles International Airport is overriding. International financiers and political leaders can always explain a “trip to Washington” and try to hide their Bilderberg participation from their voters.

There was some discussion among Bilderberg leaders of having a smaller meeting this year. The Trilateral meeting is always a “joint session” in the sense that Bilderberg leaders also attend.

A source, who has proven reliable for more than  20 years, said that Bilderbergers like former World Bank President James Wolfensohn are concerned about the growing amount of media coverage of these gatherings. Several other Bilderberg boys echoed these sentiments, according to the insider.

Timothy Geithner, United States Treasury Secretary until resigning January 25, 2013, was also overheard discussing the meeting taking place just outside of Washington.

Over the years, more and more newspapers have covered Bilderberg in their pages. Even the Post was forced to mention the secretive gathering last year after it was referred to in a number of other local Washington, D.C. publications.

Post Chairman Donald Graham, who had attended Bilderberg with his mamma, Katharine Graham, since he was in knickers, felt forced to feign ignorance when “interviewed” by his paper.

 

James P. Tucker Jr. is the world’s foremost expert on the global elite. Tucker is AFP’s editor emeritus and the author of Jim Tucker’s Bilderberg Diary.