The politicization of the assassination of OBL has begun. Watching Clinton spin the easiest decision that Obama has had to make during his presidency into the hardest was quite impressive though. Bill's still got it.
Yeah I saw that too. Here's the context for the second romney quote:
LIZ SIDOTI: "Why haven't we caught bin Laden in your opinion?"
GOVERNOR MITT ROMNEY: "I think, I wouldn't want to over-concentrate on Bin Laden. He's one of many, many people who are involved in this global Jihadist effort. He's by no means the only leader. It's a very diverse group – Hamas, Hezbollah, al-Qaeda, Muslim Brotherhood and of course different names throughout the world. It's not worth moving heaven and earth and spending billions of dollars just trying to catch one person. It is worth fashioning and
executing an effective strategy to defeat global, violent Jihad and I have a plan for doing that."
And iirc the first one was about how specific you get while you are still running for office, how close to your chest you keep your cards.
It's weird to suggest that a republican president would not have given the go ahead. I give Obama a lot of credit for things like that, but it's compared to other democrats/liberals.
The politicization of the assassination of OBL has begun.
It's better than cookiegate or the tale of two dogs; at least this is something someone actually did that actually mattered. I find it impossible to imagine a Republican president not making a big deal about bagging Bin Laden.
Originally Posted by Sasaki Kojiro
I give Obama a lot of credit for things like that, but it's compared to other democrats/liberals.
As per usual, you have a unique slant on things. Note that a very hawkish Republican president had the better part of seven years and a functionally unlimited budget to do the same thing, and yet you only give the current president credit in relation "to other democrats/liberals." So he's okay as far as pinko queer liberal tree-huggers go, eh?
I'm sorry, the 1980s called, and they'd like their parachute pants back.
Parachute pants!!! Much chuckle at this was had by me. I hadn't thought of that 80's ghastlyism of fashion in some time.
"The only way that has ever been discovered to have a lot of people cooperate together voluntarily is through the free market. And that's why it's so essential to preserving individual freedom.” -- Milton Friedman
"The urge to save humanity is almost always a false front for the urge to rule." -- H. L. Mencken
Note that a very hawkish Republican president had the better part of seven years and a functionally unlimited budget to do the same thing
The ad is "gutsy call", watch the intro again
and yet you only give the current president credit in relation "to other democrats/liberals."
and Ron Paul
It's not incomprehensible anyway, it's like someone giving McCain credit for being anti-waterboarding, but only vs other republicans, or something like that.
Last edited by Sasaki Kojiro; 04-30-2012 at 17:07.
Watched the first 15 seconds again; didn't hear anything inaccurate (just some political coup-scoring for the op). Besides which, according to the most detailed reporting that has surfaced, the decision to perform the raid was very much President 44's call.
I don't understand how it's legitimate for Bush II to base his entire presidency on 9/11, which he had nothing to do with, but it's politicizing and wicked for President Obama to say, "Hey, I got OBL" (which he actually did). It's cheesy, sure, but it's not misleading or inaccurate or the usual sort of pettifoggery we see in campaigns. It's an actual event in which he made an actual decision with an actual result. OH THE HUMANITY!
What elicits eye rolls from me about the ad is not the administration cynically using a nationally unifying event to score cheap political points or the selective editing of a Romney quote to make a completely baseless assertion about his willingness to OK such an operation. Obama & Co are just as sleazy and amoral as any other group of American politicos, and that's just American politics.
However, the claim that this was a 'tough decision' with 'a lot of downside' is insulting to my intelligence. I believe in their 'Mission Accomplished'-esce rollout last week, the administration even suggested that Obama bet his presidency on the raid.
As if. First of all, this was not - at all - a hard decision. As I said before, it was most likely the easiest decision the president has had to make during his 3.5 years - a decision any president of either party would have made without hesitation. It had a huge upside and practically no downside. Anyone familiar with our operations in the region knows that there are hundreds, perhaps thousands, of these raids conducted by SOCOM each year, both inside and outside official combat theatres and especially in Pakistan. Many of those raids are unsuccessful. The American public never hears about them. Had OBL not been at the compound, we likely never would have known about the raid. Even a worst case scenario - the raid being stopped by Pakistani forces and the SEALS captured and/or killed - would have been an obscure international incident, a dust-up between two international frienemies that would have struggled to make it to the top of GoogleNews and would have been resolved with several trunks full of crisp $100 bills, as every problem with Pakistan is.
I would be careful citing David Corn as a reliable, objective source on the president. Fred Barnes wrote a fun book on the Bush presidency, but I wouldn't call it a critical assessment.
Watched the first 15 seconds again; didn't hear anything inaccurate (just some political coup-scoring for the op). Besides which, according to the most detailed reporting that has surfaced, the decision to perform the raid was very much President 44's call.
From david corn, author of:
The Lies of George W. Bush: Mastering the Politics of Deception. New York: Crown Publishers, 2003.
Hubris: The Inside Story of Spin, Scandal, and the Selling of the Iraq War. New York: Crown Publishers, 2006. (Co-author with Michael Isikoff.)
Showdown: The Inside Story of How Obama Fought Back Against Boehner, Cantor, and the Tea Party - William Morrow, 2012.[15]
Most detailed reporting that has surfaced? Who cares about how many details?
This blog interview with an alleged insider has plenty of "details"
ORIGINALLY PUBLISHED MAY 3RD, 2011
Note: This update comes some 24 hours after our longtime Washington D.C. Insider first outlined shocking details of an Obama administration having been “overruled” by senior military and intelligence officials leading up to the successful attack against terrorist Osama Bin Laden. What follows is further clarification of Insider’s insights surrounding that event.
______________________
Q: You stated that President Obama was “overruled” by military/intelligence officials regarding the decision to send in military specialists into the Osama Bin Laden compound. Was that accurate?
A: I was told – in these exact terms, “we overruled him.” (Obama) I have since followed up and received further details on exactly what that meant, as well as the specifics of how Leon Panetta worked around the president’s “persistent hesitation to act.” There appears NOT to have been an outright overruling of any specific position by President Obama, simply because there was no specific position from the president to do so. President Obama was, in this case, as in all others, working as an absentee president.
Read more in News
« Obama Lies – Mitt Romney Never Said He Wouldn’t Go After Osama Bin Laden
I was correct in stating there had been a push to invade the compound for several weeks if not months, primarily led by Leon Panetta, Hillary Clinton, Robert Gates, David Petraeus, and Jim Clapper. The primary opposition to this plan originated from Valerie Jarrett, and it was her opposition that was enough to create uncertainty within President Obama. Obama would meet with various components of the pro-invasion faction, almost always with Jarrett present, and then often fail to indicate his position. This situation continued for some time, though the division between Jarrett/Obama and the rest intensified more recently, most notably from Hillary Clinton. She was livid over the president’s failure to act, and her office began a campaign of anonymous leaks to the media indicating such. As for Jarrett, her concern rested on two primary fronts. One, that the military action could fail and harm the president’s already weakened standing with both the American public and the world. Second, that the attack would be viewed as an act of aggression against Muslims, and further destabilize conditions in the Middle East.
Q: What changed the president’s position and enabled the attack against Osama Bin Laden to proceed?
A: Nothing changed with the president’s opinion – he continued to avoid having one. Every time military and intelligence officials appeared to make progress in forming a position, Jarrett would intervene and the stalling would begin again. Hillary started the ball really rolling as far as pressuring Obama began, but it was Panetta and Petraeus who ultimately pushed Obama to finally act – sort of. Panetta was receiving significant reports from both his direct CIA sources, as well as Petraeus-originating Intel. Petraeus was threatening to act on his own via a bombing attack. Panetta reported back to the president that a bombing of the compound would result in successful killing of Osama Bin Laden, and little risk to American lives. Initially, as he had done before, the president indicated a willingness to act. But once again, Jarrett intervened, convincing the president that innocent Pakistani lives could be lost in such a bombing attack, and Obama would be left attempting to explain Panetta’s failed policy. Again Obama hesitated – this time openly delaying further meetings to discuss the issue with Panetta. A brief meeting was held at this time with other officials, including Secretary Gates and members of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, but Gates, like Panetta, was unable to push the president to act. It was at this time that Gates indicated to certain Pentagon officials that he may resign earlier than originally indicated – he was that frustrated. Both Panetta and Clinton convinced him to stay on and see the operation through.
What happened from there is what was described by me as a “masterful manipulation” by Leon Panetta. Panetta indicated to Obama that leaks regarding knowledge of Osama Bin Laden’s location were certain to get out sooner rather than later, and action must be taken by the administration or the public backlash to the president’s inaction would be “…significant to the point of political debilitation.” It was at that time that Obama stated an on-ground campaign would be far more acceptable to him than a bombing raid. This was intended as a stalling tactic, and it had originated from Jarrett. Such a campaign would take both time, and present a far greater risk of failure. The president had been instructed by Jarrett to inform Mr., Panetta that he would have sole discretion to act against the Osama Bin Laden compound. Jarrett believed this would further delay Panetta from acting, as the responsibility for failure would then fall almost entirely on him. What Valerie Jarrett, and the president, did not know is that Leon Panetta had already initiated a program that reported to him –and only him, involving a covert on the ground attack against the compound. Basically, the whole damn operation was already ready to go – including the specific team support Intel necessary to engage the enemy within hours of being given notice. Panetta then made plans to proceed with an on-ground assault. This information reached either Hillary Clinton or Robert Gates first (likely via militarycontacts directly associated with the impending mission) who then informed the other. Those two then met with Panetta, who informed each of them he had been given the authority by the president to proceed with a mission if the opportunity presented itself. Both Gates and Clinton warned Panetta of the implications of that authority – namely he was possibly being made into a scapegoat. Panetta admitted that possibility, but felt the opportunity to get Bin Laden outweighed that risk. During that meeting, Hillary Clinton was first to pledge her full support for Panetta, indicating she would defend him if necessary. Similar support was then followed by Gates. The following day, and with Panetta’s permission, Clinton met in private with Bill Daley and urged him to get the president’s full and open approval of the Panetta plan. Daley agreed such approval would be of great benefit to the action, and instructed Clinton to delay proceeding until he had secured that approval. Daley contacted Clinton within hours of their meeting indicating Jarrett refused to allow the president to give that approval. Daley then informed Clinton that he too would fully support Panetta in his actions, even if it meant disclosing the president’s indecision to the American public should that action fail to produce a successful conclusion. Clinton took that message back to Panetta and the CIA director initiated the 48 hour engagement order. At this point, the President of the United States was not informed of the engagement order – it did not originate from him, and for several hours after the order had been given and the special ops forces were preparing for action into Pakistan from their position in Afghanistan, Daley successfully kept Obama and Jarrett insulated from that order.
This insulation ended at some point with an abort order that I believe originated from Valerie Jarrett’s office, and was then followed up by President Obama. This abort order was later explained as a delay due to weather conditions, but the actual conditions at that time would have been acceptable for the mission. A storm system had been in the area earlier, but was no longer an issue. Check the data yourself to confirm. Jarrett, having been caught off guard, was now scrambling to determine who had initiated the plan. She was furious, repeating the acronym “CoC” and saying it was not being followed. This is where Bill Daley intervened directly. The particulars of that intervention are not clear to me beyond knowing he did meet with Jarrett in his office and following that meeting, Valerie Jarrett was not seen in the West Wing for some time, and apparently no longer offered up any resistance to the Osama Bin Laden mission. What did follow from there was one or more brief meetings between Bill Daley, Hillary Clinton, a representative from Robert Gates’ office, a representative from Leon Panetta’s office, and a representative from Jim Clapper’soffice. I have to assume that these meetings were in essence, detailing the move to proceed with the operation against the Osama Bin Laden compound. I have been told by more than one source that Leon Panetta was directing the operation with both his own CIA operatives, as well as direct contacts with military – both entities were reporting to Panetta only at this point, and not the President of the United States. There was not going to be another delay as had happened 24 hour earlier. The operation was at this time effectively unknown to President Barack Obama or Valerie Jarrett and it remained that way until AFTER it had already been initiated. President Obama was literally pulled from a golf outing and escorted back to the White House to be informed of the mission. Upon his arrival there was a briefing held which included Bill Daley, John Brennan, and a high ranking member of the military. When Obama emerged from the briefing, he was described as looking “very confused and uncertain.” The president was then placed in the situation room where several of the players in this event had already been watching the operation unfold. Another interesting tidbit regarding this is that the Vice President was already “up to speed” on the operation. A source indicated they believe Hillary Clinton had personally made certain the Vice President was made aware of that day’s events before the president was. The now famous photo released shows the particulars of that of that room and its occupants. What that photo does not communicate directly is that the military personnel present in that room during the operation unfolding, deferred to either Hillary Clinton or Robert Gates. The president’s role was minimal, including their acknowledging of his presence in the room.
At the conclusion of the mission, after it had been repeatedly confirmed a success, President Obama was once again briefed behind closed doors. The only ones who went in that room besides the president were Bill Daley. John Brennan, and a third individual whose identity remains unknown to me. When leaving this briefing, the president came out of it “…much more confident. Much more certain of himself.” He was also carrying papers in his hand that quite possibly was the address to the nation given later that evening on the Bin Laden mission. The president did not have those papers with him prior to that briefing. The president then returned to the war room, where by this time, Leon Panetta had personally arrived and was receiving congratulations from all who were present.
In my initial communication to you of these events I described what unfolded as a temporary Coup initiated by high ranking intelligence and military officials. I stand by that term. These figures worked around the uncertainty of President Obama and the repeated resistance of Valerie Jarrett. If they had not been willing to do so, I am certain Osama Bin Laden would still be alive today. There will be no punishment to those who acted outside the authority of the president’s office. The president cannot afford to admit such a fact. What will be most interesting from here is to now see what becomes of Valerie Jarrett. One source indicated she is threatening resignation. I find that unlikely given my strong belief she needs the protection afforded her by the Oval Office and its immense powers to delay and eventually terminate investigations back in Chicago, but we shall see.
Stay safe.
But obviously the question is whether they are accurate details that tell the whole story, or whether, for example, someone distorted things or made them up whole sale to credit/discredit obama.
But none of the above matters for the question at hand...
Implying that other presidents wouldn't have made the call is silly. Claiming that the Romney quotes reveal that he wouldn't have made the call is even sillier. Remember, the ad is about the moment of decision, when he's been briefed and just has to give the go ahead. Heck, what would the political backlash be from passing on a chance like that?
The politicization of the assassination of OBL has begun. Watching Clinton spin the easiest decision that Obama has had to make during his presidency into the hardest was quite impressive though. Bill's still got it.
I was under the impression they didn't know for sure therefore the decision was hardly easy made Yes/No
Allied with the fact it took some effort to follow the leads to the actual place twas hardly a slam dunk smash the glass lay up for Obama. (leads that prob could have been found earlier if the will had been there)
They slew him with poison afaid to meet him with the steel
a gallant son of eireann was Owen Roe o'Neill.
Bookmarks