There are knaves and there are fools
And then there are those who just play fools on TV.
On what planet has Charlie Rose been residing till now?:
“CBS This Morning” host Charlie Rose was shocked Thursday morning when Florida Sen. Marco Rubio stood by his stance that the former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton misled Americans about the cause of the 2012 Benghazi terror attack.
“[Last night] I said Hillary Clinton lied about Benghazi,” Rubio said in a post-debate interview. “There’s no doubt about that, Charlie.”
Rose defended Clinton by blaming intelligence.
“The CIA was changing its own assessment of what happened there,” Rose told Rubio.
“That’s not accurate,” Rubio countered…
se was baffled as to why the former first lady would lie about Benghazi.
“If you’re calling her a liar by saying she perpetuated a lie, then why do you think she did that? What was her motive?” Rose asked.
For your viewing pleasure:
Bravo for calling out Hillary’s lie – this cannot be done too often. But Rubio is a co-sponsor of CASA, the federal Campus Accountability and Safety Act, initiated by Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand, who brought Columbia’s mattress girl to the SOTU. The bill’s intrusion into campus discipline cannot be reconciled with any conservative principles – it doesn’t even address the rights of accused students. Sponsorship of this bill reveals Rubio to be a big-government SJW. But no Rebpublican/conservative will call him on this, to maintain the fantasy that this appealing politician can represent their views. I look forward (likely in vain) to the day when he is forced to explain himself on this to Republicans.
Greg,
More about the CASA bill:
http://www.cotwa.info/2015/07/senators-mccaskill-heller-ayotte-and.html
Interesting. It does seem like a hot-button issue that the GOP should be looking at. It’s definitely an issue the Right needs to engage. If the Right tackles it effectively on broader spectrum, the GOP could/should follow suit in their lane.
I was intel for 20 years in the Navy, and I knew this administration was lying as soon as they said they were relying on the CIA to tell them what happened at a State Department facility. As opposed to, say, the surviving State Department employees.
Consider this; we had two violent incidents at diplomatic facilities in North Africa on the same day.
Why should the administration rely on “intel” to figure out what happened in Benghazi, but we don’t need “intel” to tell us what happened in Cairo?
Nor for that matter do we need to rely on the CIA to tell us what happened at the Marine barracks in Beirut in 1982, the attack on the Pentagon on 9/11/2001, or the Boston Marathon bombing in April 2013.
So why is one thing all of a sudden different from the other things?
Also Rubio should have pointed out that when he said the Democrats already had a SUPERPAC, he was thinking of Rose.
Charlie Rose and his ilk are not intelligent people. They sit around telling each other how smart they are, but they just aren’t.
How do we keep losing to these dolts?
Rubio correctly pointed out that the MSM was effectively a Democratic party SUPERPAC.
Rubio’s political blemishes and foibles are many, many of which I had submitted in comments here. But they are all in-house and of concern only to those in it. Irrespective of all his shortcomings, he makes not a valuable contribution but a vital one. No contribution to the political storm is more important than the truth. Mr Rubio has no obligation to get on board a policy position; he is, however, obliged to defend the truth. No opportunity that would present itself may be dismissed as inappropriate to making it known that Mrs Clinton, like her fellow Alinskyite and Commander-in-chief Obama, were and are inveterate liars.
Republican Senators Kelly Ayotte and Joni Ernst are also co-sponsors of the CASA bill. Not sure if they’re considered true conservatives, though.
Fool vs knave is neatly summed up by “narcissist.” I think Rose fits that.
Did anyone see the ridiculous Washington Post editorial today about how RUBIO was lying about HILLARY? RIDICULOUS. The press is making fools of themselves by trying to spout this nonsense. Even a 3rd grader would understand that Hillary LIED.
K-E:
The press knows its audience, and they’re not making fools of themselves with that audience.
Charlie Rose should be on Hillary’s payroll. He’s doing the job and he should be paid.
Perhaps I’m preaching to the choir.
What I was driving at @ October 30th, 2015 at 3:45 pm is that the CIA only is useful for burying the truth under a mountain of overclassification.
If any commander wandered down to intel to ask what was going on with his or her troops while they were in contact, I’d tell that commander they were doing things wrong. They need to get over to their operations center and talk to their troops directly.
Politely.
This administration has been doing things wrong, and they’ve been doing it deliberately. Their best source of real-timeinformation was their own personnel on the ground. Yet they cut those people out of the loop and decided to go with what an analyst at Langley thought based on limited information.
Hello!
“Intel failure” has entered the lexicon; it’s an all purpose excuse. But in reality what we have is a leadership failure looking for an excuse. What we should have learned from Gulf War I, and what everyone in intel was saying at the time, is that intel is no substitute for a robust inspection regime. But now 20 years on Kerry and Obama are saying our intel will provide us with perfect knowledge the state of Iranian nuclear R&D.
BS. But they’re counting on the fact that not enough people will no better. They’re alibiing themselves. And when the wrong tool they chose for the job doesn’t do the job, they’ll blame the tool.
Another intelligence failure.
That would be like claiming you are going to sharpen a knife by pounding the edge with a hammer, and when the knife ends up duller than before blaming it on the hammer.
Another hammer failure.
Steve57: “What we should have learned from Gulf War I, and what everyone in intel was saying at the time, is that intel is no substitute for a robust inspection regime.”
Well, yeah. That’s why, by law and policy, the principal casus belli for Operation Desert Fox in 1998 and Operation Iraqi Freedom in 2003 wasn’t the intel as many believe, but actually Iraq’s noncompliance with the “governing standard of Iraqi compliance” (UNSCR 1441) for disarmament mandated by UNSCR 687 (1991), ie, breach of ceasefire, that was confirmed by the UNSCOM and UNMOVIC inspections.
I recall that there were riots outside of 10+ US embassies all of the world on 9/11/2012, and that the rioters were able to hoist the AQ flag from the flagpole on the ground of our embassy in London. That, plus the attack being on ***9/11***, made the YouTube video explanation unbelievable from the get-go. In fact, we regularly immediately recognize terror attacks, such as the Ft. Hood shooting and the Boston Marathon bombing, despite whatever lies the media and this administration spin.
Charlie Rose must still be operating under the assumption that the media has the power to tell a story (their preferred narrative over the truth)and we’ll believe it.
I was impressed (hate to say it) with how Hillary! managed *not* to pop her cork a week or so ago facing the House Whatever Committee,
(but she’s an accomplished liar and will do virtually anything she needs to do to be crowned The First XX Chromosome President Evah),
and I am impressed (happy to say it) with how Rubio managed *not* to pop his cork in that clip, dealing with that arrogant mainstream media hack.
Lizzy, 5:53 pm — “Charlie Rose must still be operating under the assumption that the media has the power to tell a story (their preferred narrative over the truth) and we’ll believe it.”
Charlie Rose, meet John Harwood.
Rubio not only didn’t “pop his cork in that clip,” he also delivered a comprehensive and clear explanation of what happened that can be understood by anyone. And did it while still looking cute as a button. Don’t knock that last part — it’s a very big deal in today’s world.
Ann: “Don’t knock that last part – it’s a very big deal in today’s world.”
True dat, UNFORTUNATELY. Abe Lincoln could not get elected today.
Charlie Rose appears to be a loathsome human being in that clip. I’ve never watched him and haven’t watched CBS news for 15 years. Does he always come across like that? What in the world is his appeal?
>>Charlie Rose, meet John Harwood.
Yeah, it’s most of the media, especially national TV news people. They really believe it’s their job to interpret the news for us, and determine which stories are important. Really inflated sense of their own importance, and I think it really vexes them when the people assert interest in a story or an inconvenient fact that they’ve told us is unimportant.
Intentional vs Unintentional. That is the judgment people must make.
Lizzy:
Another thing that made it crystal clear from the start that Benghazi was a terrorist attack was they weaponry.
That one fact alone would have sealed it.
INDEED, neo, protesters do not resort to mortars, like in Benghazi!
This early evening, talk show host Hugh Hewitt touted a new guest from WaPo, opinion columnist Catherine Rampell, in part because of this (on the last debate).
https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/lessons-learned/2015/10/29/7d23d98e-7e78-11e5-b575-d8dcfedb4ea1_story.html
Hugh explained that he had a tough time getting MSM guests to come forward and be honest about their leftist voting. Rampell
explained herself as “center-left,” hence she voted Obama twice.
At any rate, back to Rubio and Rampel. Hugh used Marco Rubio’s confrontation in Boulder on CNBC about Hillary.
Do you agree she lied? Rampell: I don’t know, I don’t think so…
or some such blatant denial
I soon lost interest and turned it off. Rampell’s reply reminded me that I no longer accept friendship from Democrats.
I used to, of course. But between Bush and Obama, Democrats started to consistently reject me as a new friend.
Therefore, I decided to return the favor with the last election, because I find few Leftist’s able to confront the reality of facts and the objective world. So, how can “we” be friends if their frame of reference rejects the world of facts that I accept as true? And their denial go so radically unpierced? (Obama’s a great president to them, not the failure and worst ever” we understand him to be.)
Rampell’s obvious denial of a factual lie by Hillary to further the narrative of the most crucial campaign to re-elect Obama? I can’t take such “people” seriously.
I think this was a conclusion I was led to by drsanity’s analysis of Leftist denial and psychosis…. Their inability to share the world of facts and discuss them sentiently and reasonable, for instance.
Speaking of which, the chief examples driving the Left bonkers are set to be revisited sooner than later…. through war and Islamic terrorism.
Item 1 – I watched Ann Patterson, Near East Assistant Secretary of State, give testimony before a Senate committee on Foreign Affairs, Wednesday (via C-Span).
She said three years ago she spent most her time on democracy promotion; now it’s counterterrorism. She was unprepared for this pivot, she explained.
Various Senator’s pushed her to anticipate whether more military assets and intervention were possibilities in the ME? She was game, but obviously politic and noncommittal. A General assisting her was more forthcoming, almost a cheerleader for prepping for engaging IS. It seems that in Washington, DC, the plate is set increase anti-IS activity, I concluded.
One Senator pushed her on the importance of meeting the War in Syria threat in general and ISIS in particular, because of the migrant crisis in Europe. Specifically, he asked, why aren’t the Europeans pushing for a root-cause solution to the Syrian war refugees overwhelming them?
Both Ann and the General went back and forth and couldn’t really answer. At the end, they booted the answer up to Sec of State Kerry and the meeting in Austria today, Friday. (The half day meeting lasted eight hours, by the way.)
The concern from Senator’s amounted almost to angst over the situation in Europe. Do they want the crisis to go on next summer? Throughout next year??? This cannot go on forever.
Item 2 – on PBS, Charlie Rose interview, Thursday night, there appeared an Admiral McCraven – ex-Navy SEAL, currently Chancellor for the University of Texas System – but more famous for commanding Special Ops during the Bin Laden raid.
I got sucked in to this interview with a veteran warrior, and listened to the hour long exchange.
McCraven minced no words: ISIS needs to be defeated now, soon as possible. Why do we have an interest? Cascade effects on friends and allies like Jordan, Lebanon, Israel, Turkey (currently being destabilized) and Europe – and ISIS metastasizing towards us in the US. Population movements are destabilizing the ME – and beyond.
In other words, the fear that the Jihad movement will go hot and global again makes resolving Syria and defeating ISIS the highest security priority today.
Item 3 – And now, Friday – Obama announces 50 special ops troops going after ISIS (advising roles, solely). And no, this isn’t an example of mission creep, he maintains.
I read all three Items as evidence of the certainty that the vector of escalation towards a War on Terror (II) is certain. Only the magnitude and timing is uncertain.
Together with the worries on the Right from debates and candidates, it may not be possible for Obama to kick the can down to the next presidency. I’m wondering if it isn’t the mounting humanitarian crisis in Europe that’s pushing Obama – or his cadre – into engaging the enemy?
What’s worries me is that he – as well as the Asst Sec Ann Patterson – is that they are playing for time: they believe Russia will have to become our anti-ISIS partner…after they get bloodied.
This may well be the case, but will certainly take a while and likely a long time. They are in gross denial that Putin’s interests come first and foremost: preserving his client state and keeping Asaad in power comes first!
Now, late news comes that in a meeting of Russia’s version of the Security Council, the Deputy PM there has floated the idea that Russia must resume Cold War Era civil defense training…because the US improves its weapons systems and therefore is a threat to them!
Cold War II is intensifying; GWOT II is beginning. How it play out it uncertain, but the direction towards war with ‘boots on the ground’ is clear.
The view from France (via France 24-TV in English) is still that the US has no will to do this. But US opinion on IS turned in august a year (or was it two) ago.
Who here doubts that 2017 will not see a more serious engagement in Syria and against ISIS if a Republican is elected President? Not I.
Another consequence: how the a Left in deep denial about Islam, Jihadism, and terrorism take this during the campaign over the next year? Deepening their collective denial?
Charlie Rose — the Uriah Heep of talk show television.
Another consequence: how the a Left in deep denial about Islam, Jihadism, and terrorism take this during the campaign over the next year? Deepening their collective denial?
The Leftist allied to Islamic Jihad. The Hussein Regime intentionally sabotaged Iraq and Afghanistan, to fund ISIL and AQ in Libya and Syria.
Senator Rubio: “Charlie…Charlie…Charlie…You, Sir, need to expose yourself to the unaccustomed terror of critical thought and do your job as a so-called reporter instead of cheerleading for Obama and Hillary. It is utterly despicable that those two spoke in that hanger at Andrews Air Force Base with the flag draped coffins before them and knowingly perpetuated their lies about Benghazi.”
He did a pretty damned good job of saying and inferring it is a, ya’know, nicer way. I support this young man for President. The Dems FEAR Marco like no other.
I watched Charlie Rose a lot a few years back. I had insomnia, and he had a late-night show. He comes off as a decent guy, even intellectually curious, who has heard that some Republicans (not the ones he’s ever met) believe some crazy things, but he can’t actually comprehend that a person he’s talking to could actually believe them. You can see it in this clip: he’s not being partisan in the sense of supporting a party’s view over another party’s view; he’s reacting as I would if someone told me that watermelons can fly.
I remember seeing him interview Thomas Sowell. It was like Sowell was teasing a five-year-old. Rose completely lacked a framework for understanding ideas that were so foreign to him.
Nick:
That’s what I mean when I say that Rose plays a fool on TV.
Eric said:
“… by law and policy, the principal casus belli for Operation Desert Fox in 1998 and Operation Iraqi Freedom in 2003 wasn’t the intel as many believe, but actually Iraq’s noncompliance with the “governing standard of Iraqi compliance” (UNSCR 1441) for disarmament mandated by UNSCR 687 (1991), ie, breach of ceasefire, that was confirmed by the UNSCOM and UNMOVIC inspections.”
Now you’re preaching to the choir.
Nick says “I remember seeing [Charlie Rose] interview Thomas Sowell. It was like Sowell was teasing a five-year-old. Rose completely lacked a framework for understanding ideas that were so foreign to him.”
Rose still believes that Obama is a sensible moderate and pragmatic president.
As neo says, he has no clue – no clue about American perceptions beyond the urban Northeast, that is.
Pauline Kael (on Nixon???) redux. But he’s my litmus check on that sort of folk, the ruling class.