http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2948134/posts
Bigger Than Watergate? Rep Issa Questions Obama’s Role in Benghazi
Big Peace ^ | 10/21/12 | AWR Hawkins
Posted on Sunday, October 21, 2012 12:43:53 PM by markomalley
On Friday Rep. Darrell Issa (R-CA) sent a 10 page letter to President Obama asking him to clarify the role of the White House in the Benghazi attacks.
In the letter, Issa pointed pointed again to the refusals to increase security. He specifically cited a 16-man security that could have been sent in but was not, because Obama allegedly wanted to lessen the number of U.S. security personnel in country in order to “normalize relations” in Libya.
Democrats are disputing this claim, because they know it will do Obama in politically if it can be proven.
Yet Issa is asking Obama to explain this very point
[The American people] deserve a complete explanation about your administration’s decision to accelerate a normalized presence in Libya at what now appears to be at the cost of endangering lives. These critical foreign policy decisions are not made by low or mid-level career officials — they are typically made through a structured and well-reasoned process that includes the National Security Council at the White House.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2948212/posts
Portman: Iran story looks like “another national security leak from the White House”
Townhall.com ^ | October 21, 2012 | ERIKA JOHNSON
Posted on Sunday, October 21, 2012 4:13:14 PM by Kaslin
It was only a few months back that there was plenty of hearty suspicion going around concerning the White House’s involvement in a specific string of high-profile national-security leaks to the media, and on MSNBC’s Meet the Press this morning, Ohio Sen. Rob Portman suggested something of the same vein in regards to yesterday’s report on possible negotiations between Iran and the United States, via the NJ:
Portman, R-Ohio, said that the fact both countries are denying the story makes it look like another inappropriate leak from the administration rather than a diplomatic breakthrough.
It looks like “another national security leak from the White House,” he said on NBC’s Meet The Press. “They’ve done a lot of that.” …
Portman added that one-on-one negotiations would also be unwise because it would cast aside countries like France, which have helped marshal sanctions.
“The last thing we want is to abandon our allies on this,” he said.
I point to Portman’s response because he’s the man who’s been tasked with trying to get inside President Obama’s head as Mitt Romney’s debate-practice sparring partner, and since he’s been so heavily involved in the preparation process, this could be a good hint for the tack that Romney will take in Monday’s third and final presidential debate on all things foreign-policy related.
Team Romney has been highly critical of both President Obama’s leak-riddled administration and his handling of the United States’ relationships with Israel and Iran, and it’ll certainly be one of the front-seat issues in the debate. If this is really something that the administration floated to help bolster the president’s foreign-policy creds just before the debate and perhaps something that the president could even bring up himself as a positive during the debate, I’d wager that Romney won’t let it be too easy for him.