Yesterday President Obama, under attack on multiple fronts for the many scandals under his administration, joined the chorus of other partisans who have resorted to simple, bald faced lies – in another of his many attempts to scatter blame for his failings on everyone but himself.
It started last week with Dem. Barbara Boxer trying to blame the GOP for cutting Embassy security budgets:
“It takes funding to protect an embassy. It takes funding to protect a consulate. It takes funding to protect an outpost. Yes, it takes funding. Who cut the funds from embassy security? The Republicans in the House, that is who — hundreds of millions of dollars. If it were not for the Democrats, it would have been cut more, because when it came here, we stood our ground. We had to accommodate their cuts. That is how the process works. So I think the Benghazi ‘scandal’ starts with the Republicans looking in the mirror. Mirror mirror, who is the fairest of them all? They ought to ask: Mirror, mirror, who cut the funding for diplomatic security across this world for America? The answer: Republicans.”
This statement is an outright lie – and earned “three pinocchios” from the Washington Post Fact Checker for its falsity.
Media bastion of the left, MSNBC, continued Boxer’s attack with former DNC Communications Director and soon to be MSNBC host, Karen Finney attempting to deflect the blame for the dead in Benghazi on the GOP:
“I believe that is what the GOP is most terrified of having to talk about. Because they know they screwed up. Their austerity measures may have endangered this man’s life and they don’t want to talk about that … Nobody is interested in the fact fiscal year 2012 Republicans voted to remove $331 billion from security budgets at international consulates and embassies. Nobody is interested in discussing that. That was the year when Ambassador Stevens was murdered.”
Rather than address the serious questions asked of her regarding the Benghazi attack, Finney repeatedly resorted to attempting to divert blame to the GOP. And again, she as well used the same outright lies to do so.
Add Democrat William Lacy Clay, who, at the Benghazi hearings, also repeated the false claim that the GOP voted for embassy security funding budget cuts, and those budget cuts may be to blame for the Benghazi attack.
Those pesky things known as facts, however, show all of these claims to be false – and that they are worse that that, outright lies. Business as usual for that certain segment.
Apparently believing ‘a lie repeated often enough becomes fact’, the next participant in this little game, was President “Not Me” himself. Attempting to shift blame from his and his administration’s failures, he admonished that Congress needs to “fully fund our budget request to improve the security of our embassies around the world.”
”Not me” and “I know nothing” are the most common refrains we’ve heard the last few weeks regarding all of the scandals coming from this administration.
So … what do the facts show?
There is plenty of direct evidence – and the facts show these statements to be outright, bald faced lies..
Few people, let alone the media, seem to bother to actually research, and verify the facts anymore these days, but the data and information IS all there and available to the public if you know where to look. The US STATE DEPARTMENT Budgets are online and the “Embassy Security, Construction and Maintenance” section shows the portion allocated to this issue.
These State Department budget documents show OBAMA and his administration – NOT the GOP – REDUCED the budgets by 36+% from 2009 to 2011 (and 31% overall from 2009 to 2012). The line item breakout for “Embassy Security” alone provides even stronger evidence against Obama’s direct lies about Republicans reducing diplomatic security money.
The FACTS show OBAMA’s requested budgets from 2009 thru 2011 and 2012 dramatically reduced amounts for the “Worldwide Security” portion of the Embassy Security, Construction and Maintenance” budgets.
OBAMA’s requested State Department Worldwide Security spending budgets:
2009 $1.868 billion
2010 $0.847 billion (cut by 54.6% from 2009)
2011 $0.824 billion (cut by 55.9% from 2009)
2012 $0.938 billion (cut by 49.8% from 2009)
The irrefutable facts are that Obama’s budget requests cut over $1 billion from 2009 to 2010.
And that OBAMA – not the GOP – cut spending requested for Embassy Security by nearly 50% from 2009 to 2012. The GOP clearly has nothing whatsoever to do with the President’s budget requests.
It is fact that OBAMA and his administration – NOT the GOP or anyone else – reduced the budget for Embassy Security, Construction and Administration by 31% overall, and by almost 50% for the “Worldwide Security” budget for Embassies portion, from 2009 to 2012.
A review of the FACTS also shows yet another outright lie in the claim the GOP “VOTED” to reduce embassy security spending for last year. The facts show a bipartisan vote – with slightly MORE Democrats than than Repubs - approved the 2012 budget. It is easily verified FACT that 149 DEMOCRATS and 147 Republicans voted to approve a 2012 budget of $1.54 billion for 2012.
The Republicans did NOT reduce, nor did they vote to reduce, the Embassy Security budgets – period.
Obama’s administration then went on to refuse repeated, increasingly desperate, requests to provide security to Benghazi, and instead removed the small security force that was there over the objection of the Regional Security Officer and the head of the security team.
Yet Obama and the State Department can find plenty of money in the budget they had requested be decreased, to send Chevy Volts and $108,000 charging stations to cushy and safe embassies like Vienna’s. How much security could have been provided in Benghazi for the cost of just ONE Chevy Volt (at $45,000+) and one $108,000 charging station?
I suspect Ambassador Stevens, and the families of the other Americans who died’, would like to know that answer.
Apologists have been repeating these same outright false claims since Benghazi occurred – here is a prefect example: “… the gop congress DENIED additional funds for security requested by sec clinton, pull your head out of your ass”
I suggest folks learn the real facts, rather than regurgitating uninformed, uneducated and outright false partisan rhetoric. These apologists and excuse-makers, including President Obama, keep repeating this same tired, and outright false partisan claims. Claim’s that are easily shown as outright fabrication – easily verified as bald faced lies … the truth is the 2012 budget was passed with strong bipartisan support. These attacks that Republicans denied funds to protect diplomatic posts are completely unsupported in any way.
A look at the details follows … lets start with a quote from a news report, verifying the facts regarding the 2012 State Dept Budget:
“Congress, which included support from Democrats, ultimately agreed on a $1.54 billion budget. That’s slightly more than the $1.43 million committee Republicans recommended … The budget was $1.63 billion in fiscal 2011 and $1.82 billion in fiscal 2010 [reduced by Obama's administration each year]… the U.S. government is also trying to deal with severe budget constraints at a time of trillion-dollar deficits, and that last budget was passed on a bipartisan vote — more Democrats ended up supporting it than Republicans. 149 Democrats voted yes, along with 147 Republicans.”
Republicans did not vote against an increase in embassy security – the facts show 149 Democrats and 147 Republicans voted for the 2012 State Dept budget which Obama and his administration had cut by 31% from 2009 to 2012.
Detailed below, you can see the data that verifies it was OBAMA and his administration – NOT THE GOP – that reduced the embassy security budgets – thru their annual funding requests.
OBAMA’s requested 2010 State Dept budget REDUCED “Embassy Security, Construction, and Maintenance” spending by more than $830 million dollars compared to 2009. In 2011 Obama and his admin reduced the budget even further – almost $1 billion less than 2009. And although Obama requested a small increase in 2012, the request was still nearly $850 million less than 2009:
2009 estimated: $2,646,597
2010 requested: $1,815,050
2010 requested vs 2009: ($ 831,547)
2011 requested: 1,681,500
2012 requested: 1,801,517
The bipartisan vote – 149 Democrats and 147 Republicans – awarded them $1.54 billion for 2012 – a small decrease from 2011. The small 2012 budget reduction from that requested was absolutely NOT, as widely claimed, caused by the GOP. It was approved in a strongly bipartisan vote – with MORE Democrats than Republicans approving.
ONCE AGAIN – THE CLAIMS THE GOP REDUCED, or “VOTED TO REDUCE”, SPENDING FOR EMBASSY SECURITY ARE PROVEN AS OUTRIGHT LIES.
It is also verifiable fact that Obama – a huge proponent of the Chevy Volt – in a time of trillion dollar deficits, and knowing they had dramatically reduced Embassy Security budgets, has chosen to waste large sums on Volts and related accessories for embassies, while refusing to honor serious requests for security in highly volatile and dangerous areas. That decision cost four Americans their lives.
Deciding HOW to spend the bipartisan approved budget is EXACTLY the President and his administration’s responsibility.
In a time of tight budgets Obama and his administration’s budget priorities have been shown to include such important expenses as spending large sums on Chevy Volts and $108,000 charging stations. They have also approved fully staffed security details in non-violent places like Barbados – which they admit has a contingent of 12 Marines – who are often tasked with such important “security” activities as leading a fitness test for young athletes. While at the same time refusing to provide even the most basic security, despite repeated requests, in the highly volatile Benghazi area.
It has been proven beyond a shadow of doubt the administration ignored the strong recommendation of both the Regional Security Officer and of the head of the security team that WAS there that the administration had pulled. While safe paces like Barbados had a dozen marines on security detail, the President refused security to one of the most dangerous places we operate in.
We now also know the answer to Hillary’s “3 am call” campaign ad questioning Obama’s ability to handle a crisis. When the “3am call” came Obama’s administration refused to send any significant help during the 7 hour attack – despite assets within an hour away and having both a drone with live video, and direct communications with the American’s on the ground under attack.
When the “call” came – Obama was so concerned …. he went to bed:
“Previously we were told that Obama had been briefed on the attack prior to going to bed on the night of 9-11-12. The whereabouts and condition of Ambassador Stevens were not yet known. Yet Obama, we were told, went to bed and only learned of Stevens’ death the following morning.”
The State Department officials testified that they were able to monitor events at the consulate in real time – we had a drone overhead. Obama had a live feed from a drone above the battlefield, and real time communications with the American’s under attack, yet he tucked himself in not even knowing how the battle would end. The Commander in Chief didn’t stick around to see if we won or lost or whether the missing ambassador had survived or not.
The following day, after briefly acknowledging Stevens’ death, Obama again skipped his Presidential Daily Briefing and flew off to a Vegas fundraiser.
And then later, Obama had the audacity to joke about those American deaths not being “optimal.” The mother of one of those killed – who had survived the first 6 hours of the battle – pointed out the hypocrisy – her son was certainly not optimal – he was dead.
Despite all the platitudes, excuse-making, obfuscation and shallow promises – we are left with a President, an administration, and an entire political party, in disarray. With all continuing to attempt to deflect blame – that is rightfully and demonstrably theirs – with zero regard for the truth of their claims and statements.