May 5, 2013: Issa Reveals Explosive Details From Benghazi Whistleblowers
Maybe the REAL thing they are trying to hide is that Obama did go to bed and it was really Valerie Jarrett calling the shots.That would make Obama actually look like a puppet who is allowed to take outrageous vacations and play golf all the time, while an unelected person is making all the decisions in Obama's name, without Obama's involvement or participation.
THAT would make people step back and ask why Obama is even there, if others are doing all the work.
This wouldn't be a case of an "executive" President (like Reagan was reported to be) who actively lays out strategic parameters and let's his subordinates work out the actual details. This would be a case of a completely disengaged President who is not participating in the daily rigors of the job.
Same thread, the debate continues...
So you say Obama ordered the stand-down, and I say that Obama was disengaged and Valerie Jarrett ordered the stand-down, even though she is not in the chain-of-command. The end result is the same, the order to stand down.If Obama left it to Jarrett and then walked away, it would be extreme deriliction of duty. Obama is the President, not Jarrett. Obama convinced 50 million people to vote for him just weeks after this happened, not Jarrett.
If Obama was found to have lied to the American people in order to win the election, and then cover it up after he won, and if the MSM and the people behave as they have in the past (Nixon covering up the break-in), then Obama SHOULD be forced from office. Americans don't like blatent stealing and cheating from their leaders.
And especially if it was the election that the People feel was won on false pretenses, not stolen votes.
The debate goes on...
Still more...
Still, my point is this: If Obama did not give any order - stand-down or go - because he wasn't there and it was Jarrett giving the order, would Panetta accept that as legal chain-of-command? Would the Generals?I think that's our disagreement. You are saying that Obama did give the order, because he must have due to the chain-of-commang standing down. I am saying that a differnt chain-of-command was accepted, with Jarrett, not an absent Obama, calling the shots.
And everyone accepted it as Constitutional and authorative
Got it. Default inaction.It concludes...I would have hoped to see people try harder to get Obama into the game. I can't beleve that a "Do Not Disturb" sign hanging from Obama's door was enough to stop the most powerful military in the world.
I'm sure that sent a very clear message to our enemies about how America will react to aggessions. Just do it after 9:00PM ET on a weeknight.
More like, Jarrett said don't wake him up because he has a big day tomorrow in Las Vegas.May 8, 2013: Live Thread: Benghazi Whistleblowers Hearing 11:30 A.M. EDT 5/08/13Still, taking that from Jarrett is a de facto order to stand-down, if that was what was the standing default order. It's the same thing: Panetta took unconstitutional orders from Jarrett, not Obama. He should have walked right past her and knocked on Obama's door himself.
I still wonder if Obama was absent and others (Jarrett?) gave "orders" that were followed in Obama's name?
-PJ
“I think that’s our disagreement. You are saying that Obama did give the order, because he must have due to the chain-of-commang standing down. I am saying that a different chain-of-command was accepted, with Jarrett, not an absent Obama, calling the shots.
And everyone accepted it as Constitutional and authorative “
No. Ham and Gaouette did not. And were relieved. ALL top echelon military and covert executives have now left, IIRC.
Congress has seen the documentation. They are complicit.