Providing material aid and comfort to an enemy in time of war is treason. That’s what the law’s been since there’s been law.
By this definition, the congressional GOP is actively engaged in treason. (I know: so what else is new?)
Now, it certainly stands to reason that a party entirely devoted to blocking any aid or assistance to Americans suffering from the deep and lasting effects of a Republican-fueled economic meltdown was already half way down the r0ad t0 treason, but this post-elect0ral corpse-humping has hit the levels of hysteria and pointless finger pointing that the GOP had HOPED to turn into the “October Surprise.” How proud must they be.
Water- carrier, the ever-reliable GOP talking-points operative, Jennifer Rubin has finally ginned up the headline the GOP was lo0king for all October:
BREAKING: The president knew the truth about Benghazi
Jennifer Rubin / Washington Post
In a blockbuster report, John Solomon, the former Associated Press and Post reporter, has ferreted out the president’s daily brief that informed him within 72 hours of the Sept. 11 attack that the Benghazi attack was a jihadist operation…
“In a blockbuster report,” meaning that Rubin didn’t report the story, but merely repeats a report from a “former” AP and WP reporter. The “former” part automatically ought to give us pause — since his current job ought to be more important than his past résumé and doesn’t directly bear, except to raise suspicions as to why he’s no longer working for either the AP or WaPo — but, of course, it doesn’t.
Rather than debunk, let’s see what all this GOP “truth” looks like in the light of day (while assiduously remaining upwind from the steaming aroma wafting from it — it is not exactly an efflorescence.)
So, I guess the President (presuming this latest round of mud-slinging is factual, which it generally and reliably hasn’t been at all this year) didn’t tell the American people the c0mplete operational truth and details on an event shrouded in the mists of war? Didn’t provide all the information on a military attack on an American consulate and then its “annex” (i.e. “safe house”)? Yeah. Because I remember the Bushies telling us all relevant information on all the 9-11 stuff and the two invasions? You know, like “yellowcake uranium” which was lovingly saved for the State of the Union Address? (And wasn’t a bit true.) Rubin maunders on to the “meat” of this blockbuster revelation:
Citing officials directly familiar with the information, Solomon writes in the Washington Guardian that Obama and other administration officials were told that “that the attack was likely carried out by local militia and other armed extremists sympathetic to al-Qaida in the region.”
Solomon cautions that there were bits of evidence pointing to a spontaneous attack but, as Eli Lake of the Daily Beast and others have reported, he writes: “Among the early evidence cited in the briefings to the president and other senior officials were intercepts showing some of the participants were known members or supporters of Ansar al-Sharia — the al-Qaida-sympathizing militia in Libya — and the AQIM, which is a direct affiliate of al-Qaida in northern Africa, the officials said.”
Seems weird that Solomon wouldn’t LEAD with “the Washington Guardian” which must SURELY be such a Titan of Journalism that Mr. S0lomon’s former employers wouldn’t require recitation to buttress the Guardian’s incredible record of journalistic excellence and its many Pulitzer and Polk prizes.
But at least they tell us what Rubin doesn’t, WHY this is so gosh-darned important that Republicans have been scrambling for weeks to find an actual THERE there (from the Guardian article, crosslinked in Rubin’s partisan persiflage):
screencap of the Solomon article Rubin refers to
Why It Matters:
The question of what the president and administration knew about the nature of the attacks on the consulate in Benghazi has become a huge political controversy. In addition, the potential nomination of Susan Rice to be secretary of state has been endangered by the controversy.
Evidently, it’s important because it’s a ‘controversy.’ And of course, “p0tential nomination” has all the real world gravitas and actual reality as my “potential night of wild sex” with Queen Elizabeth II of England. Admittedly, the former is more PROBABLE, but as anti-abortionists fail to realize, “potential” and “actual” are horses of an entirely different color. So let’s go back over the weasel words used in the “WHY IT MATTERS,” shall we?
A huge political controversy is important for other reasons than that it is controversial. It is a logical tautology, as in “a bachelor is an unmarried man,” which tells you nothing new. A controversial controversy ought to have an easy to understand basis OTHER than it’s a controversy, and “endangers” a “potential nomination.”
But I want to focus on the viper’s love shown in the additional “WHY IT MATTERS”: that it “endangers” a potential for “Susan Rice.” Really? If this were a concern, then why toss logs on the latest Bonfire of the Hannitys?
No: “concern” like this gets you killed. It’s like shoving somebody into the path of an oncoming bus to keep them from stepping on a piece of gum.
And what of this “controversy” wherein members of Congress and its allied GOP smear corps have harped for weeks, desperately LOOKING for reasons for controversy?
When you set out to FIND a controversy, it generally indicates that you want the controversy far more than you want facts. (I know: so what else is new?)
It used to be that these selfsame bloggers attempted to deflect ANY criticism of Dubya Bush by conflating himself with his presidential authority as “Commander In Chief” (which was ALSO the excuse Ollie North gave for obeying illegal orders, Iran Contra hearings listeners will recall).
Now, it is reversed: in attempting to attack the person of Barack Obama for having the temerity to have been elected President, they attack the Commander In Chief.
And here are the political consequences: the military leadership is hamstrung. The United States remains in a state of pointless paralysis, as the historically damned 112th Do Nothing Congress screams about … controversy?
Al Qaeda gets official USA credit for an attack that they may or may not have had anything to do with, but are now “Officially” successful AND have “caused” the mighty United States to fall to its knees with backbiting and false accusations of something dark, even though, since September, no one has been able to put the “controversy” in any terms more clear than did the Washington Guardian.*
To the enemies of America, a giant propaganda victory is given, SPECIFICALLY to Al Qaeda. And, American command and control is diverted from paying attention to their latest round of recruitment, courtesy of the “patriots” of the GOP.
(Could it be, perhaps, that the Commander In Chief and Joint Chiefs DIDN’T want to give Al Qaeda credit, specifically to keep them from scoring a propaganda victory? Oh my good lord goodness NO! How incredibly scandalous! Fortunately, the GOP has remedied that.)
And that’s called giving material aid and comfort to the enemy in time of war.
But to me, and many like me, what this unholy spectacle appears as is not so much the continual inability of the Conservatives and the GOP to differentiate between their political enemies and their ACTUAL enemies (viz. those who would unelect them versus those would happily decapitate them), but more as the all-but-literal desecration of the corpses of the honored dead.
Because without our four American dead, the GOP would have nothing to base their gift to Al Qaeda on.
GOP Qaeda must have Stockholm Syndrome, methinks.
* Can’t find a lot on the Washington Guardian, since it’s a 2012 startup. However, we find this on FOX 45 WBFF Baltimore (with a link embedded in its header, as well):
FOX45 NEWS FEATURES
The Washington Guardian is an online newspaper committed to providing watchdog journalism from the nation’s capital aimed at safeguarding everyday Americans’ tax dollars, security and freedoms.
I think that may be a hint. And I’m sure the Washington Post appreciates Rubin’s plugging of the new rightie media startup. The paper’s “about us” is just breast-beating boilerplate invoking Sam Donaldson, and is of no help in identifying our new media outlet. According to their trademark registration, they’re owned by “Packard Media Group LLC”
Packard says this about John Solomon on its page:
As Executive Editor of The Washington Times in 2008-09, Mr. Solomon rapidly expanded the reach of the newspaper into other mediums while increasing its readership….
The Washington Times, of course, is the newspaper founded by Sun Myung Moon, and run by his son, “Preston” under the umbrella News World Communications.
And, finally, it turns out that John Solomon IS Packard Media Group LLC, according to the American Journalism Review.
Nice to know where this stuff is, finally, coming from. Solomon is doing this solo, mon.