Offering without a shred of evidence
But there was no gathering. There were no people. There was no fray. It was totally quiet outside the facility until terrorists stormed the compound and killed our ambassador and three others.He then becomes Mitt Romney.
The video? A complete irrelevance. It was a coordinated, sophisticated terror attack, encouraged, if anything, by Osama bin Laden’s successor, giving orders from Pakistan to avenge the death of a Libyan jihadist.
You are offended by this accusation, Mr. President? The country is offended that your press secretary, your U.N. ambassador and you yourself have repeatedly misled the nation about the origin and nature of the Benghazi attack.So Chuck has information that the orders came from Pakistan, and is absolutely sure that this is an indisputable fact? Where is his goddamned proof, or is he just being misleading?
Statement by the Director of Public Affairs for ODNI, Shawn Turner,
As we learned more about the attack, we revised our initial assessment to reflect new information indicating that it was a deliberate and organized terrorist attack carried out by extremists. It remains unclear if any group or person exercised overall command and control of the attack, and if extremist group leaders directed their members to participate. However, we do assess that some of those involved were linked to groups affiliated with, or sympathetic to al-Qa'ida. We continue to make progress, but there remain many unanswered questions. As more information becomes available our analysis will continue to evolve and we will obtain a more complete understanding of the circumstances surrounding the terrorist attack.The NYT did a reasonable fact check of the affair
The fact is that the Obama administration at the official press conference called it an act of terror, no matter how you try and parse it, a candidate trying to make political hay the day before; is irrelevant at best. The facts of the matter are still not in, or does Chuck have direct links to Al Qaeda in Pakistan? If so, could he please publish his correspondence.
Screaming terrorist at every event is all too easy, it is the first thing out of all Republicans mouths, gosh and they might even be right from time to time, it shows they are not weak on defense, even if they do vote to reduce the security budget.
House Democrats issued a memo stating that since 2010, House Republicans have voted to reduce the embassy security funding requested by President Obama by approximately half a billion dollars. This was done despite security concerns and the need for updated or additional construction of security walls for some embassies and consulates such as the one in Benghazi.Funny how Charles didn't get quite so snotty about Bush or is his memory defective?
Charles Krauthammer falsely claimed that "the Bush administration had seven years after 9-11, no successful attacks in the United States." In fact, there were repeated terrorist attacks on U.S. soil under President Bush after the 9-11 attacks.If Chuck wants to appear to be credible, perhaps he should review what he says and writes first.
So Mr Krauthammer where is your definitive proof?