Dittos, 

ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT
Back Home Button
The Rush Limbaugh Show
Excellence in Broadcasting
RSS Icon
ADVERTISEMENT

EIB WEB PAGE DISGRONIFIER

Shameless Regime Blames Bad Intel

BEGIN TRANSCRIPT

RUSH: Patty in Syracuse.  I'm glad you called.  Hello.

CALLER:  Hi, Rush.  It's good to talk with you.

RUSH:  Thank you.

CALLER:  I was calling because I'm listening to the stuff about the intelligence on this terrorist attack and everything, and it reminds me of when the Democrats and liberals came down so hard on Bush about 9/11, and the failure of intelligence and what a big debacle it was, and now that the tables are turned --

RUSH:  You know what?  This is an excellent point.  And how about the intel failure of weapons of mass destruction?

CALLER:  Exactly.

RUSH:  That was worldwide intel.  That was the CIA, that was MI5, it was MI6, it was Interpol, it was everybody. Everybody said Saddam had weapons of mass destruction.  It was intel.  And they ripped Bush a new one for listening to the bad intel, for having bad intel, for not having good intelligence. And now this bunch is using bad intel as an excuse.  In fact, I just got audio sound bites from some of the stuff that's happened since the program began.  They are trying to bail Susan Rice out at this State Department hearing by saying, "Well, it was just bad intel," even though they've got their own intel unit at the State Department, they report to the White House.  This cover-up is inept, but it's underway. 

Let's go to the sound bite.  Here is Jay Carney this afternoon at the press briefing in the White House, and this is during an answer about the newly released information that there was no protest before the attack on the consulate. It was not something spontaneous. It was not a video that started it.  Here's what Carney said.

CARNEY:  The information she had at that point from the intelligence community is the same that I had at that point.  As time went on, additional information became available.  Clearly we know more today than we did on the Sunday after the attack.  The point we have made all along, initial assessments in the immediate aftermath of the attack in Benghazi were made, and it was a government-wide assessment that was the foundation of what Ambassador Rice said, what I said, and what others said.  It is what we knew based on the limited facts we had available to us at that time.  They were conclusions of the intelligence community for the entire government.

RUSH:  This is shameless.  I told you earlier we had a story, shared the details with you from the US News & World Report, or maybe it was the Washington Examiner.  At any rate, this is exactly what they're trying to do now.  Bail Susan Rice out, it was bad intel.  Jay Carney, what he's telling you here is, "I thought it was the video. For eight days I thought it was the video and the president thought it was the video because we got bad intel.  It was a government-wide assessment that was -- all we could do was deal with the intel."  She's exactly right, bad intel is an understandable, acceptable excuse.  Nothing to see here, folks, don't blame us. We just had bad, bad intel.  But the State Department threw this overboard. 

There's more coming up.

BREAK TRANSCRIPT

RUSH: The AP, obviously the Administration Press, with a story on the State Department. You know, because you listen to all this, you know the State Department has said that we had no intel involving a video. There was no intel that said that this was a spontaneous uprising in Benghazi.  The State Department says that, State Department testifying right now before Congress. 

AP, headline:  "State Department Reveals New Details of Benghazi Attack."  Oh, really?  You couldn't get a more pabulum headline.  "State Department Reveals New Details of Benghazi Attack. ... The account answers some questions and leaves others unanswered. Chief among them is why for several days the Obama administration said the assault stemmed from a protest against an American-made Internet video ridiculing Islam, and whether the consulate had adequate security."  The account answers some questions and leaves others unanswered?  Chief among them -- which is which? 

The cover-up is underway.  The cover-up continues with the Drive-Bys doing everything they can to cover up.  Jay Carney, White House press briefing, first one in two weeks, "We just had bad intel.  I'm sorry.  We did the best we could.  We just had bad intel.  The information that Susan Rice had at the time, the information I had, it was the best we had."  They're laying this off on the CIA now.  They're laying this off on General Petraeus.  Petraeus runs the CIA.  And so now they have met, they've had their crisis meeting this afternoon, and they've decided to dump this on intel.  And they know that the press will accept it. 

Of course, weapons of mass destruction, that's what the intel said that Saddam had, you know how that wasn't accepted.  The bad intel was evidence that Bush ought to go.  Bad intel, Bush lied.  Bad intel, Bush is incompetent. Bad intel, Bush sucks.  All of this stuff.  And from that they tried to delegitimize the entire Iraq war.  And now the same people come up and cite bad intel as their excuse for blaming a video for two weeks when the video had nothing to do with it, by the State Department's own admission. 

Let's continue here with the audio sound bites.  Patrick Kennedy is a State Department employee, undersecretary of state for management.  So many bureaucratic levels.  He's testifying on Capitol Hill and they're trying to save Susan Rice.  That's the UN ambassador.

KENNEDY:  We have always made clear we were giving the best information we have at the time and that information has involved (sic). For example, if any administration official, including any career official, were on television on Sunday, September 16th, they would have said what Ambassador Rice said. The information she had at that point from the intelligence community is the same that I had at that point. Clearly, we know more about today than what we did on September after the - Sunday, September, after the attack.

RUSH:  This is unbelievable.  Let me recap very quickly what we know.  Yesterday the State Department has a conference call.  They include every media outlet except Fox.  In the conference call they admit that they did not ever have any evidence that there was a video involved here and that it was not spontaneous.  They come clean because they've gotta go testify before Congress today.  That testimony is under oath.  Nobody wants to lie under oath, and so they come clean. 

Now, while they're testifying, they're trying to save the bacon of everybody that went out there and blamed the video.  "Well, on September 16th, that's all anybody knew. That's the best intel we had.  It wouldn'ta mattered if we sent Elmer Fudd out there, he woulda said the same thing Susan Rice did."  The thing is, Susan Rice went out there, it was something very specific. Spontaneous riots that were encouraged by what happened earlier in the day at the Cairo embassy, and the spontaneous riots were due to the video made by that rotten filmmaker making fun of the prophet in California, and that just led to an eruption in Benghazi and then before anybody knew anything, our ambassador was dead.  That was the detailed story she went out with, the State Department saying today, "That was the best intel we had at the time." 

So it's clear what's happening.  The State Department doesn't want to go up there and lie. They are falling on the sword that they just didn't have any good Intel.  They've got their own intelligence, a Bureau of International Research or some such thing, the BIR, just like the defense has the Defense Intelligence Agency.  And they all report to this guy, Clapper, at the White House, James Clapper.  Clapper, by the way, is the guy who said the Muslim Brotherhood, they're no big threat here. The Muslim Brotherhood, they're just like barbers, you know, at the corner barbershop.  They're harmless guys. 

This is outrageous to me.  This is a bigger cover-up with far more ramifications and consequences than Watergate.  This is huge.  We got four dead Americans here, and they're dumping it on intel.  "Well, it doesn't matter who we sent out on September 16th, doesn't matter, Susan Rice, Elmer Fudd, had the same story."  Here's Darrell Issa, who is the chairman of the Government Reform Committee, hearing the diplomatic security situation in Libya.  The Deputy Assistant Secretary for International Programs, Charlene Lamb, had to testify, and during the Q&A, Issa said this to Charlene Lamb.

ISSA:  The September 11th cable from the now-deceased ambassador expresses current concerns on that day. Repeatedly in the cables that were denied to us, what we see is people telling you that Al-Qaeda type organizations are coming together.  The problem I have is that the State Department is basically saying Mr. Nordstrom didn't do his job. He didn't make a formal request with justification.  The ambassador didn't do his job.  He didn't make a good enough case.  And that's what you're standing behind here today, a compound owned by us and serving like a consulate was in fact breached approximately 60 days before the murder of the ambassador in that facility.  Isn't that true?

RUSH:  And this is what Charlene Lamb said.  This is her answer, and Issa's follow-up.

LAMB:  Sir, we had the correct number of assets in Benghazi at the time of 9/11 for what had been agreed upon.

ISSA:  To start off by saying you had the correct number and our ambassador and three other individuals are dead and people are in the hospital recovering because it only took moments to breach that facility somehow doesn't seem to ring true to the American people.

RUSH: Okay, now, just to recap this. Earlier today Robert Gibbs, the former White House pretty secretary, said that Susan Rice was not lying; that she was relying on intelligence briefings. Okay, so they set this table sometime last night, after the State Department makes its call. This is why Fox was not invited, I'm now convinced. Fox isn't invited because the State Department and the media are coordinating something.

They're collaborating. They're coordinating the presentation of all this today to bail Rice out, Obama out, Hillary out. That's what's at stake here. They didn't invite Fox on purpose. Guaranteed. I can't prove it, but guaranteed. Fox is always included in these conference calls. So Gibbs goes out this morning and says Susan Rice wasn't lying. She was just relying on intelligence briefings.

Now, I hasten to remind you: The State Department is part of the US intelligence community. There's a State Department intelligence division called the Bureau of Intelligence and Research, the BIR. It works closely with the CIA, the Directorate of National Intelligence, and the National Security Council, especially on any intelligence matters related to US diplomacy.

Now, if the State Department's now saying that they never put out any info saying the movie caused the attack in Libya -- and if State is part of the intelligence community that puts out intelligence briefings -- how are we supposed to believe that Susan Rice was relying on intel briefings? They said yesterday they didn't have any intel on the video; they didn't have any intel on spontaneous protests.

That's now their excuse!

They didn't have any intel on it, and yet that's what everybody in the administration was saying. So today they say, "Well, that's the best we knew at the time." There was no intel that made this absurd movie claim! That's what they said last night after the conference call. They said there was no intel involving the movie or the spontaneous eruption. Today, somehow, Susan Rice and everybody went out and blamed the video because of bad intel.

Folks, we're been smoked gloriously here.

Our intelligence is being insulted, and we've got a collaborating media now helping spread this myth. There was no intel that made this absurd movie claim. It's something the White House made up! And today the State Department is testifying, "Well, Susan Rice was just going on the best intel we had at the time." So Obama had a choice: Blame the movie or blame the utter failure of his policy in Libya, and obviously he chose to blame the movie. He sent everybody out to lie.

Now, since he sent them all out to lie, it's time to protect 'em.

That's what all this BS testimony is all about.

BREAK TRANSCRIPT

RUSH: Okay, so you probably have an obvious question: "Well, if the State Department didn't have any intel on this movie video and the spontaneous attack, then where'd the White House get it?" They made it up! They knew there was a video out there. They just used it. The State Department said last night they didn't have such evidence. There was no evidence a video had anything to do with this.

Yet today they're saying, "Susan Rice said it was a video, and that's all anybody coulda said on September 16th because that's all we had." They said last night they didn't have it. So it's a legitimate question. If nobody had intel that it was the video, then where'd Obama get it? We're being lied to again here, folks, all to protect Obama and members of his regime who were sent out to lie and to cover up.

Jake Tapper is not having any of it. Jake Tapper was talking to what's-his-face, Carney, today. Jake Tapper said, "President Obama, shortly after the attack, told 60 Minutes that ... Romney 'has a tendency to shoot first and aim later,'" when he was talking about all of this. "Given the fact that so much was made out of the video, that apparently had absolutely nothing to do with the attack on Benghazi, that their wasn't even a protest, outside the Benghazi post, didn't President Obama shoot first and aim later?"

CARNEY: Your assessment about what we know now, uhh, is not complete. But I would simply say that --

TAPPER: I'm just going by what the State Department said yesterday.

CARNEY: There is no question that in the region, including in Cairo, there were demonstrations, uhhh --

TAPPER: I'm talking about Benghazi.

CARNEY: -- reacting to, uhh, the, uhhh, release of that video. Uh, and I will leave it to those who are, uhh, testifying on the Hill to talk about wha... as they are --

TAPPER: They said yesterday that there was no protest.

CARNEY: I'm not disputing that there was a protest (sic), but what we said at the time is that our intelligence community assessed that the attack began spontaneously following protests earlier that day at our embassy in Cairo, okay?

RUSH: Okay. So what he wants to say is that the video was responsible for what happened in Cairo, and that the best intel we had is that those protests inspired what happened in Benghazi. Folks, these people are lying through their teeth. It makes Watergate look like Romper Room! I'm telling you flat-out. And Jake Tapper just called him on it. Everything we've said on this program, Tapper said. (paraphrased exchange)

"Look, the State Department said there was no video. There was no spontaneity to the attack."

"Well, you don't know everything that we know," and he went back to the video.

I can't believe he went back to the video! Jay Carney went back to the video. The State Department said yesterday there's no evidence it was connected. So Carney... They're now gonna try to make the case that the video was responsible for Cairo, and that their best intel was that Cairo inspired Benghazi. But now they know they were wrong. So that's their story, and that is what they're gonna stick to.

BREAK TRANSCRIPT

RUSH: So the big question now is: Who gave Rice and everybody else the intel that it was the video that caused all this? Who is the source? 'Cause the State Department says it wasn't them. Jay Carney said it's responsible for what happened in Cairo. So where'd that come from? I think we all know. (chuckles)

END TRANSCRIPT

ADVERTISEMENT

Rush 24/7 Audio/Video

Listen to the Latest Show Watch the Latest Show

Facebook

ADVERTISEMENT

Most Popular

EIB Features

ADVERTISEMENT: