Skip to comments.
Who Wrote Susan Rice's Talking Points, This Time?
Breitbart ^
| 2 Jun 2014
| by DEBRA HEINE
Posted on 06/04/2014 9:21:55 AM PDT by Resettozero
In response to The White House doubles its bet on some bad cards: For no other reason other than morbid curiosity, I'd like to know who wrote the talking points for Susan Rice's appearances on the Sunday talk shows, yesterday. It's not like she had any more credibility to lose, but Rice told some whoppers, yesterday, possibly as Allahpundit notes at Hot Air, in a calculated attempt to set a false narrative, as "most voters will pay attention to this story for 48 hours after Bergdahls release and then tune out." Even as the truth was gushing out about the deserter, Bergdahl, Susan Rice was on ABC News telling George Stephanopoulos that he was captured "on the battlefield" and that he had "served with honor and distinction." As Ace quipped, Susan Rice, like Ron Burgundy, will literally read whatever is put on a card in front of her. Bill Kristol asked some good questions, today, on Morning Joe: Those are the people who fought, who fought in the same company in some cases, and who feel like they sacrificed to get this guy back who may have behaved at best irresponsibly and at worst worse. And we need to have honesty about that. There was a big Army investigationwhat did Susan Rice know? What did President Obama know about the investigation about Bergdahl? Its one thing to trade terrorists for a real POW, someone who was taken on the battlefield fighting honorably for our country. Its another thing to trade away 5 high-ranking terrorists to someone who walked away.
(Excerpt) Read more at breitbart.com ...
TOPICS: Crime/Corruption; Foreign Affairs; Government; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: bergdahl; liar; rice; susanrice
Pukey video of Rice and Steponallofus at link. (Several days old but did not find this article posted yet.)
To: All
In response to The White House doubles its bet on some bad cards: For no other reason other than morbid curiosity, I'd like to know who wrote the talking points for Susan Rice's appearances on the Sunday talk shows, yesterday.
It's not like she had any more credibility to lose, but Rice told some whoppers, yesterday, possibly as Allahpundit notes at Hot Air, in a calculated attempt to set a false narrative, as "most voters will pay attention to this story for 48 hours after Bergdahls release and then tune out."
Even as the truth was gushing out about the deserter, Bergdahl, Susan Rice was on ABC News telling George Stephanopoulos that he was captured "on the battlefield" and that he had "served with honor and distinction." As Ace quipped, Susan Rice, like Ron Burgundy, will literally read whatever is put on a card in front of her.
Bill Kristol asked some good questions, today, on Morning Joe: Those are the people who fought, who fought in the same company in some cases, and who feel like they sacrificed to get this guy back who may have behaved at best irresponsibly and at worst worse. And we need to have honesty about that.
There was a big Army investigationwhat did Susan Rice know? What did President Obama know about the investigation about Bergdahl? Its one thing to trade terrorists for a real POW, someone who was taken on the battlefield fighting honorably for our country. Its another thing to trade away 5 high-ranking terrorists to someone who walked away.
To: Resettozero
She is shameless with the ease that she repeats the lies hanged to her to repeat on TV.
A real independent media would be all over her for it, they have no shame either.
3
posted on
06/04/2014 9:43:30 AM PDT
by
sickoflibs
(King Obama : 'The debate is over. The time for talk is over. Just follow my commands you serfs""')
To: sickoflibs
How can one characterize Rice’s default facial expression? There’s like a sad, shamed look to it, like a dog that’s been caught chewing up a shoe. Worried? Evil? How can it be described?
4
posted on
06/04/2014 9:52:52 AM PDT
by
duckworth
(Perhaps instant karma's going to get you. Perhaps not.)
To: Resettozero
I think Samantha Power is behind this sock puppet, or at least was, while they were at the UN
Now that Rice speaks for the man behind the screen and probably has to submit written requests to see him, I would assume General ValJar is maintaining a tight grip on the “public narrative” and running the country
5
posted on
06/04/2014 9:57:23 AM PDT
by
silverleaf
(Age takes a toll: Please have exact change)
To: silverleaf
Now that Rice speaks for the man behind the screen and probably has to submit written requests to see him, I would assume General ValJar is maintaining a tight grip on the public narrative and running the country.
With the aid (until today anyway) of Hitlary's Media Matters talking points distributed to all good media boys and girls.
To: Resettozero
7
posted on
06/04/2014 10:06:27 AM PDT
by
BenLurkin
(This is not a statement of fact. It is either opinion or satire; or both.)
To: BenLurkin
President Jarrett?
Yes. Who shall I say is calling her?
To: Resettozero
Ms. Rice cannot seem to keep her foot out of her mouth.
She is CLEARLY not suited for Sunday Morning Talk Shows. She should probably never make any public statements, ever.
9
posted on
06/04/2014 10:24:49 AM PDT
by
Mr. Quarterpanel
(I am not an actor, but I play one on TV)
To: Resettozero
Obvious to me why they put her out there again. She is already damaged from Behghazi. Nothing to lose by compounding the damage caused by her statements on Bergdahl.
10
posted on
06/04/2014 10:27:43 AM PDT
by
CityCenter
(Resist Obamacare!)
To: Mr. Quarterpanel
She is CLEARLY not suited for Sunday Morning Talk Shows. She should probably never make any public statements, ever.
I agree. They should stuff her in some out-of-the-way office job as, say, Ambassador to the UN or National Security Advisor. Couldn't do the Administration much harm then?
To: Resettozero
He served “with honor and distinction” for which side? For such rabid anti-Americans, that was likely a completely accurate statement.
12
posted on
06/04/2014 11:39:46 AM PDT
by
afsnco
To: Resettozero
To: afsnco
He served with honor and distinction for which side? For such rabid anti-Americans, that was likely a completely accurate statement.
Like I've said...
Our enemies in the highest places are openly hiding in plain sight, telegraphing exactly where they stand on EVERY matter.
Non-FReepers just aren't willing to believe what is plainly visible and audible!
To: Resettozero
Susan Rice is supposed to be an intelligent woman who has a large role in setting our foreign policy. NOBODY should be writing her talking points. She should be evaluating her information and deciding how to respond to reporters' questions.
We have to assume either she's writing what she says or that she's a total incompetent.
15
posted on
06/04/2014 11:49:09 AM PDT
by
grania
To: grania
We have to assume either she's writing what she says or that she's a total incompetent.
...or is a lying' skank.
To: grania
Or another option, she is an Islamic infiltrator placed in the WH to control the narrative, and at all cost protect the cause.
17
posted on
06/04/2014 12:00:27 PM PDT
by
Toespi
To: Resettozero
LOL!!!
That would be a good place....She couldn’t get into trouble there...
...Wait...Never mind.
18
posted on
06/05/2014 5:00:23 AM PDT
by
Mr. Quarterpanel
(I am not an actor, but I play one on TV)
Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson