• Guest, The rules for the P & N subforum have been updated to prohibit "ad hominem" or personal attacks against other posters. See the full details in the post "Politics and News Rules & Guidelines."

Bumbling House GOP, in effort to attack Obama on Benghazi, expose CIA cover on TV

Phokus

Lifer
Nov 20, 1999
22,995
774
126
Edit: Since the idiot conservatives aren't understanding what happened here (typical), i think these 3 posts sums it up well:

The state dept official did not refer to anything about the CIA. It was the Republican twit from Utah who interjected that into an open hearing.
The State Dept guy didn't leak anything. He showed an unclassified satellite photo and the Rep was like "There's classified stuff and I was told not to talk about it but here I am talking about it on live TV!!!" You dumbass, it's a satellite image of the whole compound, of course it's showing buildings where classified activities go on.
You aren't understanding. The State Dept guy didn't show anything classified. All he showed was a satellite image. The Republican was the one who started yapping about things being classified.
Where have we heard this before? Yet another instance of the GOP putting party above country. If democrats had done this, there'd be calls of treason. Well, i'm going to call a spade a spade: The GOP would sell out this country for a dime if it meant winning elections. They should be, at the very least, censured, if not thrown out of office.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/dana-milbank-letting-us-in-on-a-secret/2012/10/10/ba3136ca-132b-11e2-ba83-a7a396e6b2a7_story.html?hpid=z7

When House Republicans called a hearing in the middle of their long recess, you knew it would be something big, and indeed it was: They accidentally blew the CIA’s cover.

The purpose of Wednesday’s hearing of the Oversight and Government Reform Committee was to examine security lapses that led to the killing in Benghazi last month of the U.S. ambassador to Libya and three others. But in doing so, the lawmakers reminded us why “congressional intelligence” is an oxymoron.

U.S. ambassadors killed in the line of duty: U.S. Ambassador to Libya John Christopher Stevens is the eighth American ambassador to die in the line of duty since 1950. Here are the others.
Video

New details of what led to Ambassador Christopher Stevens’s death in Libya emerged this afternoon. In a heated, partisan back-and-forth, Darrell Issa said security at the mission in Benghazi could have been better. Diplomatic correspondent Anne Gearan joins us, to tell us what she heard in the hearing.
You may also like...

Ruth Marcus
The artful dodger

Richard Cohen
Tough-guy talk
Through their outbursts, cryptic language and boneheaded questioning of State Department officials, the committee members left little doubt that one of the two compounds at which the Americans were killed, described by the administration as a “consulate” and a nearby “annex,” was a CIA base. They did this, helpfully, in a televised public hearing.

Rep. Jason Chaffetz (R-Utah) was the first to unmask the spooks. “Point of order! Point of order!” he called out as a State Department security official, seated in front of an aerial photo of the U.S. facilities in Benghazi, described the chaotic night of the attack. “We’re getting into classified issues that deal with sources and methods that would be totally inappropriate in an open forum such as this.”

A State Department official assured him that the material was “entirely unclassified” and that the photo was from a commercial satellite. “I totally object to the use of that photo,” Chaffetz continued. He went on to say that “I was told specifically while I was in Libya I could not and should not ever talk about what you’re showing here today.”

Now that Chaffetz had alerted potential bad guys that something valuable was in the photo, the chairman, Darrell Issa (R-Calif.), attempted to lock the barn door through which the horse had just bolted. “I would direct that that chart be taken down,” he said, although it already had been on C-SPAN. “In this hearing room, we’re not going to point out details of what may still in fact be a facility of the United States government or more facilities.”

May still be a facility? The plot thickened — and Chaffetz gave more hints. “I believe that the markings on that map were terribly inappropriate,” he said, adding that “the activities there could cost lives.”

In their questioning and in the public testimony they invited, the lawmakers managed to disclose, without ever mentioning Langley directly, that there was a seven-member “rapid response force” in the compound the State Department was calling an annex. One of the State Department security officials was forced to acknowledge that “not necessarily all of the security people” at the Benghazi compounds “fell under my direct operational control.”

And whose control might they have fallen under? Well, presumably it’s the “other government agency” or “other government entity” the lawmakers and witnesses referred to; Issa informed the public that this agency was not the FBI.

“Other government agency,” or “OGA,” is a common euphemism in Washington for the CIA. This “other government agency,” the lawmakers’ questioning further revealed, was in possession of a video of the attack but wasn’t releasing it because it was undergoing “an investigative process.”

Or maybe they were referring to the Department of Agriculture.

That the Benghazi compound had included a large CIA presence had been reported but not confirmed. The New York Times, for example, had reported that among those evacuated were “about a dozen CIA operatives and contractors.” The paper, like The Washington Post, withheld locations and details of the facilities at the administration’s request.

But on Wednesday, the withholding was on hold.

The Republican lawmakers, in their outbursts, alternated between scolding the State Department officials for hiding behind classified material and blaming them for disclosing information that should have been classified. But the lawmakers created the situation by ordering a public hearing on a matter that belonged behind closed doors.

Republicans were aiming to embarrass the Obama administration over State Department security lapses. But they inadvertently caused a different picture to emerge than the one that has been publicly known: that the victims may have been let down not by the State Department but by the CIA. If the CIA was playing such a major role in these events, which was the unmistakable impression left by Wednesday’s hearing, having a televised probe of the matter was absurd.

The chairman, attempting to close his can of worms, finally suggested that “the entire committee have a classified briefing as to any and all other assets that were not drawn upon but could have been drawn upon” in Benghazi.

Good idea. Too bad he didn’t think of that before putting the CIA on C-SPAN.

danamilbank@washpost.com
 
Last edited:

PokerGuy

Lifer
Jul 2, 2005
13,650
199
101
Indeed, a bumbling screwup.

Of course, that would not have happened had the administration not screwed up the whole security thing over there anyway, and then tried to blame it on a movie.

Fail all around.
 

EagleKeeper

Discussion Club Moderator<br>Elite Member
Staff member
Oct 30, 2000
42,591
5
0
"A State Department official assured him that the material was &#8220;entirely unclassified&#8221; and that the photo was from a commercial satellite."

State Department were just as bonehead; They knew that the information was classified and still talked about it in an open meeting.

The heads of the committee realized that State was talking out of turn.


State had the blabbermouths :thumbsdown:
 

PokerGuy

Lifer
Jul 2, 2005
13,650
199
101
"A State Department official assured him that the material was &#8220;entirely unclassified&#8221; and that the photo was from a commercial satellite."

State Department were just as bonehead; They knew that the information was classified and still talked about it in an open meeting.

The heads of the committee realized that State was talking out of turn.


State had the blabbermouths :thumbsdown:
Yup, plenty of fail to go around. Not that the idea of CIA operations at consulates and other such places would be a shocking revelation, but still, it should not be discussed openly.
 

PJABBER

Diamond Member
Feb 8, 2001
4,822
0
0
Seriously? Rep. Jason Chaffetz (R-Utah) tries to stop the discussion in the open forum once he spots that the State Department dweeb is going into classified territory and you blame the Rs for a leak? :rolleyes:
 

dabuddha

Lifer
Apr 10, 2000
19,579
16
81
Just a heads up, when you're pasting an article, a lot of times, there's a print link which will have the text of the article without all the extra crap.
 

Phokus

Lifer
Nov 20, 1999
22,995
774
126
Seriously? Rep. Jason Chaffetz (R-Utah) tries to stop the discussion in the open forum once he spots that the State Department dweeb is going into classified territory and you blame the Rs for a leak? :rolleyes:
Yes, because it was their eagerness to TELEVISE the damn thing. What do you think would happen? The state department official was only accounting for their own personel, not the CIA's.

One of the State Department security officials was forced to acknowledge that “not necessarily all of the security people” at the Benghazi compounds “fell under my direct operational control.”

And whose control might they have fallen under? Well, presumably it’s the “other government agency” or “other government entity” the lawmakers and witnesses referred to; Issa informed the public that this agency was not the FBI.

“Other government agency,” or “OGA,” is a common euphemism in Washington for the CIA. This “other government agency,” the lawmakers’ questioning further revealed, was in possession of a video of the attack but wasn’t releasing it because it was undergoing “an investigative process.”
 

rudder

Lifer
Nov 9, 2000
19,434
84
91
Seriously? Rep. Jason Chaffetz (R-Utah) tries to stop the discussion in the open forum once he spots that the State Department dweeb is going into classified territory and you blame the Rs for a leak? :rolleyes:
Rep. Jason Chaffetz (R-Utah) was the first to unmask the spooks. “Point of order! Point of order!” he called out as a State Department security official, seated in front of an aerial photo of the U.S. facilities in Benghazi, described the chaotic night of the attack. “We’re getting into classified issues that deal with sources and methods that would be totally inappropriate in an open forum such as this.”

OP fail for sure. Maybe they should have just let the State dept. goob keep blabbering. Only a hack would blame the Representative as the one who outed a CIA operation.
 

Phokus

Lifer
Nov 20, 1999
22,995
774
126
Rep. Jason Chaffetz (R-Utah) was the first to unmask the spooks. &#8220;Point of order! Point of order!&#8221; he called out as a State Department security official, seated in front of an aerial photo of the U.S. facilities in Benghazi, described the chaotic night of the attack. &#8220;We&#8217;re getting into classified issues that deal with sources and methods that would be totally inappropriate in an open forum such as this.&#8221;

OP fail for sure. Maybe they should have just let the State dept. goob keep blabbering. Only a hack would blame the Representative as the one who outed a CIA operation.
You're an idiot, read above. Rudder Fail.

http://forums.anandtech.com/showpost.php?p=34081509&postcount=7
 

Thump553

Lifer
Jun 2, 2000
11,937
1,269
126
Exactly the sort of thing is was worried about when the House GOP scheduled this dog and pony show. This situation is appropriate for a Congressional hearing, but one properly done and after the initial ongoing investigations are over.

The real question is when is there going to be a Congressional hearing about the effect of Congress cutting security funding on this incident? I'll place my bet on Never.

These clowns should be a little more concerned about promoting the effective running of the US government and effective protection of our interests and forget the constant manuvering to score political points. These guys cast further shame on Congress.
 

Dari

Lifer
Oct 25, 2002
17,134
38
91
"A State Department official assured him that the material was “entirely unclassified” and that the photo was from a commercial satellite."

State Department were just as bonehead; They knew that the information was classified and still talked about it in an open meeting.

The heads of the committee realized that State was talking out of turn.


State had the blabbermouths :thumbsdown:
They were trying to make it look like a regular drab facility. They were lying but the idiot Congressman wanted to use his little knowledge to sex things up.

Seriously? Rep. Jason Chaffetz (R-Utah) tries to stop the discussion in the open forum once he spots that the State Department dweeb is going into classified territory and you blame the Rs for a leak? :rolleyes:
Yes, Chaffetz fucked up. He's stupid and the State official did what he was told to do...lie about the facility. The best type of secrecy is one that is out in the open for everyone to see but may have double or triple meanings. The representative from West Bubblefuck fucked up.
 

EagleKeeper

Discussion Club Moderator<br>Elite Member
Staff member
Oct 30, 2000
42,591
5
0

Throckmorton

Lifer
Aug 23, 2007
16,830
2
0
Rep. Jason Chaffetz (R-Utah) was the first to unmask the spooks. “Point of order! Point of order!” he called out as a State Department security official, seated in front of an aerial photo of the U.S. facilities in Benghazi, described the chaotic night of the attack. “We’re getting into classified issues that deal with sources and methods that would be totally inappropriate in an open forum such as this.”

OP fail for sure. Maybe they should have just let the State dept. goob keep blabbering. Only a hack would blame the Representative as the one who outed a CIA operation.
That's exactly the issue. The State Dept said it's not classified and showed a commercial satellite photo. That's how you avoid outing the CIA... Without him crying about "classified issues" no one would have suspected anything.
 

Matt1970

Lifer
Mar 19, 2007
12,320
2
0
A State Department official assured him that the material was “entirely unclassified” and that the photo was from a commercial satellite.
Are you trying to be this stupid or does it just come natural to you?

Indeed, a bumbling screwup.

Of course, that would not have happened had the administration not screwed up the whole security thing over there anyway, and then tried to blame it on a movie.

Fail all around.
And this. We wouldn't even have had this hearing if the Obama administration was straight with the public from day one and accepted these were terrorist attacks on his watch instead of trying to blame it on a YouTube video to make himsef look good right before an election.
 

Throckmorton

Lifer
Aug 23, 2007
16,830
2
0
State knew the info was classified and still blabbed in an open hearing.

Whether is was state employees in Libya or CIA; the fact that the State person at the hearing talked abouit it is the issue.

State could not keep it's mouth shut. Lack of understanding on how loose lips sink ships.

They think they are prima-donnas
No... no one said anything about classified info until the Republican brought it up on live TV.
 
Nov 30, 2006
15,456
389
121
The State Departrment was incredibly inept by showing classified information in a public forum...yet it's a Republicans fault for pointing it out. Really?
 

rudder

Lifer
Nov 9, 2000
19,434
84
91

That the Benghazi compound had included a large CIA presence had been reported but not confirmed. The New York Times, for example, had reported that among those evacuated were &#8220;about a dozen CIA operatives and contractors.&#8221; The paper, like The Washington Post, withheld locations and details of the facilities at the administration&#8217;s request.

So the outing had already been reported by news outlets? Oh but they did not report the exact location. If the fucking Washington Post knows the locations doesn't your pea brain realize that probably a lot of other people already knew?
 

Throckmorton

Lifer
Aug 23, 2007
16,830
2
0
The State Departrment was incredibly inept by showing classified information in a public forum...yet it's a Republicans fault for pointing it out. Really?
All they showed was a satellite or aerial photo, apparently from a commercial imagery provider. Even if it was shot from a freaking U2, that doesn't make it classified. And even if it was, unless you can download the original image/map, what information do you expect the public would get? As far as viewers knew, it was just like an image on Google Maps. The Republicans are the ones who bumbled in their questioning and brought up classified information and cloak and dagger spy stuff.

&#8220;I was told specifically while I was in Libya I could not and should not ever talk about what you&#8217;re showing here today.&#8221;

Way to go asshole.
 

Phokus

Lifer
Nov 20, 1999
22,995
774
126
State knew the info was classified and still blabbed in an open hearing.

Whether is was state employees in Libya or CIA; the fact that the State person at the hearing talked abouit it is the issue.

State could not keep it's mouth shut. Lack of understanding on how loose lips sink ships.

They think they are prima-donnas
The FUCKUP was deciding to TELEVISE THE DAMN THING. WHY ARE YOU DISCUSSING SENSITIVE MATERIAL ON LIVE TV.
 

Matt1970

Lifer
Mar 19, 2007
12,320
2
0
Maybe you should put that in your Sig to Phokus. Blame it on Racist voting for Republicans.
 

Phokus

Lifer
Nov 20, 1999
22,995
774
126
Are you trying to be this stupid or does it just come natural to you?



And this. We wouldn't even have had this hearing if the Obama administration was straight with the public from day one and accepted these were terrorist attacks on his watch instead of trying to blame it on a YouTube video to make himsef look good right before an election.
LOL, someone who can't even tell an onion style story from a real news story lecturing me on intelligence, that is rich! The STUPIDITY is talking about sensitive material on live tv in order to score brownie points against the president.
 

Phokus

Lifer
Nov 20, 1999
22,995
774
126
That's what the government is supposed to be doing. It's called Transparency.
Guess the government should also give out their own troop movements on TV during a war too huh? You really are this stupid.
 

Matt1970

Lifer
Mar 19, 2007
12,320
2
0
LOL, someone who can't even tell an onion style story from a real news story lecturing me on intelligence, that is rich! The STUPIDITY is talking about sensitive material on live tv in order to score brownie points against the president.
Phokus, when you are in a room full of people and you can't spot the biggest idiot, it's you.
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY