OK

This is only a Preview!

You must Publish this diary to make this visible to the public,
or click 'Edit Diary' to make further changes first.

Posting a Diary Entry

Daily Kos welcomes blog articles from readers, known as diaries. The Intro section to a diary should be about three paragraphs long, and is required. The body section is optional, as is the poll, which can have 1 to 15 choices. Descriptive tags are also required to help others find your diary by subject; please don't use "cute" tags.

When you're ready, scroll down below the tags and click Save & Preview. You can edit your diary after it's published by clicking Edit Diary. Polls cannot be edited once they are published.

If this is your first time creating a Diary since the Ajax upgrade, before you enter any text below, please press Ctrl-F5 and then hold down the Shift Key and press your browser's Reload button to refresh its cache with the new script files.

ATTENTION: READ THE RULES.

  1. One diary daily maximum.
  2. Substantive diaries only. If you don't have at least three solid, original paragraphs, you should probably post a comment in an Open Thread.
  3. No repetitive diaries. Take a moment to ensure your topic hasn't been blogged (you can search for Stories and Diaries that already cover this topic), though fresh original analysis is always welcome.
  4. Use the "Body" textbox if your diary entry is longer than three paragraphs.
  5. Any images in your posts must be hosted by an approved image hosting service (one of: imageshack.us, photobucket.com, flickr.com, smugmug.com, allyoucanupload.com, picturetrail.com, mac.com, webshots.com, editgrid.com).
  6. Copying and pasting entire copyrighted works is prohibited. If you do quote something, keep it brief, always provide a link to the original source, and use the <blockquote> tags to clearly identify the quoted material. Violating this rule is grounds for immediate banning.
  7. Be civil. Do not "call out" other users by name in diary titles. Do not use profanity in diary titles. Don't write diaries whose main purpose is to deliberately inflame.
For the complete list of DailyKos diary guidelines, please click here.

Please begin with an informative title:

Last night, Jon Stewart laid into Republicans for continuing to push their Benghazi conspiracy theory.

You may be wondering why for Benghazi, Congress has held nine full hearings, including one closed hearing; why Ambassador Pickering and Admiral Mullen issued a full accountability report chastising the State Department for their systemic failures; and why Benghazi has generally emerged as a rallying cry for the President's opponents.  When during the Bush administration, there were 54 attacks on diplomatic targets that killed 13 Americans, yet garnered only three hearings on embassy security total, and zero outrage on Fox.

So why is this attack so different for Republicans?

....

REP. STEVE KING, R-IA (12/13/2012): If you add Watergate and Iran/Contra together, and multiply it times maybe 10 or so, you're going to get in the zone of what Benghazi is.
Holy shit!  Watergate + Iran/Contra times....  So you're saying that the incident whereby order of the President of the United States, people broke into the Democratic headquarters to bug it to gain strategic advantage in a Presidential election and then covered that up by trying to use the power of the Presidency to squash the Justice Department; and then added that to the Reagan administration's secret deal to illegally sell arms to Iran in exchange for hostages and money that could then be funneled to Central American right-wing death squads, end parentheses, times 10....  (wild audience cheering and applause)

....

Where is the outrage over Obama's coverup, which we know is indeed the case?

LOU DOBBS (10/1/2012): If that indeed was the case.
"If that indeed was the case."  Wait, wait a minute.  If that indeed was the case.  See, I think I know what's going on here.  You're at DEFCON This Definitely Happened, not DEFCON If That Indeed Was the Case.  Do you see what I'm saying?  I think that's why people might not be outraged, because I think you're saying you're not sure yet.
SEAN HANNITY (11/15/2012): What if the President lied about Benghazi, and what if in fact he knew about this much earlier?

JON SCOTT (5/7/2013): What if it turns out that their lives might have been saved?

SEN. LINDSEY GRAHAM, R-SC (5/7/2013): Well, what if it turns out that Benghazi was the death trap?

STEVE DOOCY (10/16/2012): If there has indeed been a coverup?

PETER JOHNSON, JR. (10/21/2012): If he did nothing.

JAY SEKULOW (11/13/2012): If he lied.

SEN. LINDSEY GRAHAM, R-SC (10/16/2012): If that's the case...

FOX NEWS GUEST (12/21/2012): If that's the case, John, that's outrageous.

PETER JOHNSON, JR. (10/21/2012): Then that is the shame of America.

JAY SEKULOW (11/13/2012): The consequences, of course, would be significant, including possible impeachment, if he lied.

Yes!  If!  And if dingleberries were diamonds, I could open a Kay Jewelers in my pants!  If!  If!!  I think I see the problem here.  You can't understand why everyone else isn't as outraged as you, when it's because the rest of us aren't sure if what you're saying is true.  And to be quite frank, you do have somewhat of a history of hysteria.

....

You may be right.  But the denizens of Bullshit Mountain have cried wolf before.  And after eight months of intensive investigations, you should be able to better state your case than this from yesterday.

5/6/2013:

STEVE DOOCY: It sounds like what you've described, sounds like there's been a coverup, but what were they trying to cover up?

REP. JASON CHAFFETZ, R-UT: Well again, this is why we're fighting for the truth.  None of this would've come out, if the Oversight Committee, if Darrell Issa, if our committee didn't continue to pursue this.

YOU HAVE NO FUCKING IDEA!!!  (audience cheering and applause)

If what you're saying is true — and it's an important question — if what you're saying is true, if the President let Americans die for political reasons, then by God, bring us the evidence, and we will grab the pitchforks and torches along with you.

But remember, that game goes both ways.  Let me try.  In 2011, the State Department requested funding for worldwide security protection and upgrades, money that could perhaps have gone to protect Benghazi.  The Republicans like Darrell Issa, who's heading up this committee, voted to cut that funding, maybe because of political reasons in an election year, to make the President look weak, thus sacrificing Americans for political gains.  Did that happen?

Video and full transcript below the fold.
Intro

You must enter an Intro for your Diary Entry between 300 and 1150 characters long (that's approximately 50-175 words without any html or formatting markup).

Let's get to the top story tonight, testimony from government whistleblowers on the devastating and tragic attacks that cost four American lives in Benghazi, Libya.  Testimony that will blow the lid off the giant coverup propagated by this administration.
GRETA VAN SUSTEREN (11/16/2012): Brace yourself, it's happening in just 9 1/2 hours, former CIA director David Petraeus will take the oath and testify about Benghazi.
I'm sorry, that was a snafu.  That was actually the warning to brace yourself for November's Benghazi testimony by David Petraeus that was going to blow the lid off the giant coverup propagated by this administration.  All right, my mistake.

This, today's hearing, was the hearing moment everybody's been waiting for.  Go.

SEAN HANNITY (1/23/2013): We begin with the moment everybody's been waiting for, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton's highly anticipated testimony about what happened in Benghazi.
I apologize once more.  That was from the January Benghazi hearings.  While that also failed to blow the lid off the giant coverup propagated by this administration, today, Wednesday....
SEN. LINDSEY GRAHAM, R-SC (5/6/2013): Come Wednesday, you're going to start hearing the truth about Benghazi, and it's gonna make you mad.  It's gonna make you upset.
"And if it doesn't, we'll have another one until it does."

You may be wondering why for Benghazi, Congress has held nine full hearings, including one closed hearing; why Ambassador Pickering and Admiral Mullen issued a full accountability report chastising the State Department for their systemic failures; and why Benghazi has generally emerged as a rallying cry for the President's opponents.  When during the Bush administration, there were 54 attacks on diplomatic targets that killed 13 Americans, yet garnered only three hearings on embassy security total, and zero outrage on Fox.

So why is this attack so different for Republicans?

REP. MICHELE BACHMANN, R-MN: This makes Watergate look like child's play, Megyn.
Oh!  Well, that is serious, that is serious, and it's not a term people throw around lightly.  (listens to earpiece)  I'm sorry?  Oh, she was talking about Solyndra?  I'm sorry, she was talking about Solyndra there.  Um, do we have anybody talking about Benghazi?
REP. LOUIE GOHMERT, R-TX: This is far worse than Watergate.
Far worse than Watergate!  Well, there you have it.  Benghazi is far... (listens to earpiece)  Sorry about that?  He's talking about the Fast & Furious.  The movies?  Because I didn't care for Tokyo Drift, but I don't think it....  Oh right, the thing with the guns and the tracing of them.

Well, if Fast & Furious was far worse than Watergate, what's Benghazi?

REP. STEVE KING, R-IA (12/13/2012): If you add Watergate and Iran/Contra together, and multiply it times maybe 10 or so, you're going to get in the zone of what Benghazi is.
Holy shit!  Watergate + Iran/Contra times....  So you're saying that the incident whereby order of the President of the United States, people broke into the Democratic headquarters to bug it to gain strategic advantage in a Presidential election and then covered that up by trying to use the power of the Presidency to squash the Justice Department; and then added that to the Reagan administration's secret deal to illegally sell arms to Iran in exchange for hostages and money that could then be funneled to Central American right-wing death squads, end parentheses, times 10....  (wild audience cheering and applause)

Well, I'm in!  I'm in.  How could it not be?  I'm in!

What did the President do?  

RETIRED LT. COL. RALPH PETERS (5/8/2013): When it all went down in Benghazi, the administration, facing the election, went into panic mode, wanted to contain it, don't send in the military, don't blow this into a bigger thing than it's gonna be. ... So the Obama administration in this case was cowardly, duplicitous, and they sacrificed American lives for politics.
You know what, actually?  Outrage justified.  For the President of the United states to consciously allow Americans to die, to protect his own political chances, is damning, and your level of anger is in fact justified.  As is the question you've been asking now for eight months.
STEVE DOOCY (12/31/2012): Where's the media outrage on Libya and Benghazi?

JON SCOTT (11/2/2012): Why is this story not getting more coverage in the mainstream media?

MONICA CROWLEY (12/12/2012): Where is the outrage?

Yes!!  That came out of nowhere.  Where is the outrage over Obama's coverup, which we know is indeed the case?
LOU DOBBS (10/1/2012): If that indeed was the case.
"If that indeed was the case."  Wait, wait a minute.  If that indeed was the case.  See, I think I know what's going on here.  You're at DEFCON This Definitely Happened, not DEFCON If That Indeed Was the Case.  Do you see what I'm saying?  I think that's why people might not be outraged, because I think you're saying you're not sure yet.
SEAN HANNITY (11/15/2012): What if the President lied about Benghazi, and what if in fact he knew about this much earlier?

JON SCOTT (5/7/2013): What if it turns out that their lives might have been saved?

SEN. LINDSEY GRAHAM, R-SC (5/7/2013): Well, what if it turns out that Benghazi was the death trap?

STEVE DOOCY (10/16/2012): If there has indeed been a coverup?

PETER JOHNSON, JR. (10/21/2012): If he did nothing.

JAY SEKULOW (11/13/2012): If he lied.

SEN. LINDSEY GRAHAM, R-SC (10/16/2012): If that's the case...

FOX NEWS GUEST (12/21/2012): If that's the case, John, that's outrageous.

PETER JOHNSON, JR. (10/21/2012): Then that is the shame of America.

JAY SEKULOW (11/13/2012): The consequences, of course, would be significant, including possible impeachment, if he lied.

Yes!  If!  And if dingleberries were diamonds, I could open a Kay Jewelers in my pants!  If!  If!!  I think I see the problem here.  You can't understand why everyone else isn't as outraged as you, when it's because the rest of us aren't sure if what you're saying is true.  And to be quite frank, you do have somewhat of a history of hysteria.  Not that you've necessarily blown things out of proportion with this President or created highly emotional narratives concerning this President.  I do remember this salute airing on Hannity just 100 days into his Presidency.

(clip of Hannity show from 4/29/2009 with "Carmina Burana" playing to grainy scary clips of Obama's first 100 days)

Three months in, you had him as Damien in The Omen.

You may be right.  But the denizens of Bullshit Mountain have cried wolf before.  And after eight months of intensive investigations, you should be able to better state your case than this from yesterday.

5/6/2013:

STEVE DOOCY: It sounds like what you've described, sounds like there's been a coverup, but what were they trying to cover up?

REP. JASON CHAFFETZ, R-UT: Well again, this is why we're fighting for the truth.  None of this would've come out, if the Oversight Committee, if Darrell Issa, if our committee didn't continue to pursue this.

YOU HAVE NO FUCKING IDEA!!!  (audience cheering and applause)

If what you're saying is true — and it's an important question — if what you're saying is true, if the President let Americans die for political reasons, then by God, bring us the evidence, and we will grab the pitchforks and torches along with you.

But remember, that game goes both ways.  Let me try.  In 2011, the State Department requested funding for worldwide security protection and upgrades, money that could perhaps have gone to protect Benghazi.  The Republicans like Darrell Issa, who's heading up this committee, voted to cut that funding, maybe because of political reasons in an election year, to make the President look weak, thus sacrificing Americans for political gains.  Did that happen?

FOX NEWS GUEST (12/21/2012): If that's the case, John, that's outrageous.
(audience cheering and applause)

We'll be right back.

Jon then mocked CNN's Nancy Grace for having a split screen when the two reporters were in the same parking lot.
Meanwhile, Stephen of course covered his sister's loss to the disgraceful Mark Sanford in SC-01, and in placing some blame on the voters themselves for being so blindfuck stupid, he looked at how Republicans disagree with Obama just to spite him.
Stephen then looked at how a magazine is suggesting babies go diaperless.

Jon talked with actress Carey Mulligan, and Stephen talked with the former acting director of the CDC, Richard Besser.

Extended (Optional)

Originally posted to BruinKid on Thu May 09, 2013 at 05:00 AM PDT.

Also republished by Electronic America: Progressives Film, music & Arts Group.

EMAIL TO A FRIEND X
Your Email has been sent.