Coming up Wednesday
Why did Candy Crowley interject on Libya in debate? She wanted to 'move this along'
This morning on "Starting Point with Soledad O'Brien," CNN's Candy Crowley talks about her experience moderating the second presidential debate with Mitt Romney and President Barack Obama.
Many folks are talking about Crowley's statement that President Obama was right when he claimed that he called the U.S. Consulate attack in Benghazi an "act of terror."
"I was trying to move this along," Crowley says. "The question was Benghazi...there was this point they both kind of looked at me, you know, Romney's looking at me, the president is looking at me, and I wanted to move this along. Can we get back to the - so I said, he did say "acts of terror", called it an "act of terror", but Governor Romney, you were perfectly right that it took weeks for them to get past the tape."
See more in the clip above.
Latest Videos
Soledad, please for the sake of all. GO AWAY! You are not aprofesional, you are not a journalist.
Please go away or go to MSNBC and take all four of your viewers with you!
Crowley's blatant cheer-leading and bias disgusted me. I had hoped for better. In general, her choice of questions showed both bias and an interest in trivia. Equal pay for women? You couldn't tee that up better for Obama if you asked him to write the questions himself. The gun-law thing? In the course of human events and a $16 Trillion debt, talk about wasting time on small matters. But when she distorted Obama's words in the Rose Garded and declared him the winner, she went too far. It was and remains inexucable. She should be fired. CNN cannot condone her behavior and remain viable as a "news" organization.
Someone should petition to remove Candy Crowley as CNN anchor, she is an insult to journalism for trying to fact check in the middle of a debate...with erroneous and misleading facts. Disregarding her leaning towards Obama, this is an insult to why we have a moderator in a debate.
Although Ms Crowley would never admit it, Obama did not call the murders in Libya a terrorist attack. The opening paragraph frames the entire speech:
"Since our founding, the United States has been a nation that respects all faiths. We reject all efforts to denigrate the religious beliefs of others. But there is absolutely no justification to this type of senseless violence."
Clearly he is talking about the video which he continued to do for two more weeks. The word 'terror' was not used until later in the speech after talking about the 9/11 attacks in the US.
So Mr/MS Editor Oh I mean Moderator. Are my comments left out of this because I didn't yell and scream and use filthy language and inappropriate innuendos. Or because I said the truth and CNN does not know what that is, so CNN cuts out my comments?
Ms Crowley gave the president 9% more time. I understand CNN is now saying it's because the president talks slower so they are counting words now. How will they count the stutters of Governor Romney? Of all the speeches the president has given, why did Ms Crowley have the transcript of the Rose Garden speech? Worse, how did the president know she had the transcript?
Candy Crowley shame on you.
Whatever. She should be fined and her fee for hosting the debate clawed back. Lehrer and Raddatz did a pretty decent job considering their liberal backgrounds. Crowley was a disgrace. It's not the moderator's job to side with any of the actual participants and she knows that, as does Soledad so why are we even discussing this or entertaining any excuses for it? And she looked like a house in that suit. The end.
The liberal activist Crowley's performance during the debate in backing up Obama's untruths, is indicative of the reason I refuse to watch CNN. Bias!!!
It was irritating enough to have to endure a debate with such a biased moderator as left wing liberal Democrat, Crowley, but when she expanded her role to live on-air fact checker, she crossed the line. Neither she, CNN which employs her, nor the vast left wing media outlets who pounced on her erronioous and, most likely, contrived assessment of what Obama claimed he said that morning in the Rose Garden, have any credibility or, as far as many are concerned, integrity left after that outrageous interjection. Despite her ensuing half-hearted 'mea culpa' in post debate forums, the damage had been done, and the American people were once again duped by the President, this time though with the direct assistance of the main stream media.
Crowley is a competent, though biased, reporter (but not a journalist in the strict sense of the term), so it struck me as disengenuous, having read the entire transcript of Obama's remarks in the Rose garden, that she could fail to notice the lack of connection between his use of the term 'terror' and the attack on the embassy. That was tantamount to the President giving a speech in Phoenix and mentioning the day's high temperature, then later claiming that he had thereby addressed the issue of global warming in the speech..! But Crowley didn't see this? Give me a break, Sugar.
What we actually saw was a contrived plan to trap the challenger by relying on this disconnected reference and, with the assistance of the so-called Moderator, which, given the established FACTS surrounding the incident, would have left any honest person befuddled and at a loss for words. In other words, Obama sunk to a heretofore inconceivabley low level integrity with that lie.
The Romney camp should be able to make hay with this incident because it blows open up the question of why, if he knew the morning after that it was a terrorist attack, why he spent 2 weeks trying to dupe the American people with that bogus story about a film. And what's beautiful about it is, it doesn't take a lot of smarts to know the answer to that question.....another insult of the average Joe, by Mr. Obama.
But he may have outfoxed himself in the process, and I do hope the Romney campaign will pick up on the fact that by virtue of even mentioning terror in that speech, when according to him over the ensuing 2 weeks, depending on which of Obama' ORIGINALs stories you choose to believe, he either did not know the circumstances of the attack, or he believed from day one that it was all related to the film..! I believe this speech shows that Obama actually knew that morning that it was a terrorist attack, but was trying to avaoid having to admit it, for political purposes. Instead, he and his minions orchestrated and perpetrated a delibate and egregious lie in an attempt to mislead the nation.
And this is the guy some would like to see running the country for another four years..?
I did in fact watch the President' original statement from the Rose Garden the day following the attacks in Libya and I have seen the about face taken by his entire Administration in the past week. It is apparent that there is reason for cover up of some sort regarding the actual events of that day. What is most disturbing to me as an American Citizen is that not only is our President and the State Dept more than willing to mislead us, but that the Press has become entirely complicent in that deception. I have had enough!
An intelligent and experienced woman such as Candy Crowley knows how damaging a moment like this is for the Romney campaign. It appears she took advantage of her role (intentionally or not) and made a huge impact on the message of the debate. A large part of the american public is not following the post-debate commentary to understand why her confirmation of Obama's comments in the rose garden were only telling part of the story. This is a moderator moment that will go down in history. Very unfortunate moment for Crowley.
She decided to sacrifice her career to help Obama get reelected. Of course she's history with any future debate moderations but she'll probably be named US Ambassador to France or something if Obama is elected.
I thought Candy did a very creditable job as moderator. I appreciated both parts of the fact check on Libya, something being overlooked by Fox and Rush and their minions. You can tell who lost by all the opprobrium being heaped on Candy. When things go well for the right they are triumphal in taking credit for the win; when they lose they're always the victims of a "liberal" mainstream media conspiracy. Their whining has been loud enough and long enough they have often successfully intimidated members of the MSM, and altered the focus of the news. Don't let them get to you Candy.
Hey CNN it is time for you to fire Candy. She was so pro obama. if you do not fire her or put her on 3 year leave, I will never watch cnn again.
Candy over stepped her position at a key moment during the debate and this is totally unacceptable.
CNN is off my channel list, my computer news watch, and anything that receives their broadcasts since this ridiculasly obvious supporting of a cover up.
Wise up CNN, drop her like a hot potato and stop the bleeding of your new found loss of viewers due to her actions!
@Kaleb I don't want a cool Pres. or one that can sing, I want one that can fix our economy and get us back to work 100% of us. But the good news is most people saw right thru her which is hard to do and know Romney is the one to fix this country
Candy was unprofessional and biased. To 'move things along' she sides with Obama and makes Romney look wrong. Plus what professional journalist makes a statement without the facts? (Oops maybe that is part of journalism now.)
America does not need "cool", it needs a "leader".
I wonder if Candy is an undecided voter..... my guess is NO. Candy you almost got through the debate without showing your undeniable bias, but just selecting by 7-4 questions in favor of Obama, and tailored well calculated interruptions of Romney just wasn't enough. You reminded me of a 3 year old who is bursting to tell a secret on a sibling, giddy in knowing that what you have up your sleeve can cause damage, in this case to Romney.
Candy Crowlley is a liar-working for the Omaba corrupt administration.I will never watch her or cnn.I lost all respect for that liar-she is a truly liberal person worse than the liberal media -if that's possible.
Sad, that Crowley was NOT impartial in being moderator- She showed WHY Americans do NOT trust the Lapdog Media, as they show their efforts in 'covering up for Obama and being complicit'. Just HOW did Obama KNOW, to ask
Crowley to 'find the transcript from the Rose Garden".....was it a Lucky Guess? I think not. IMO, Crowley had it right there, handy to 'enforce Obama's LATEST excuse for the Terrorist Attack in Bengazi, when he went on for days about it being the result of some dumb video and that it was spontaneous'. Crowley 'was in the tank for Obama and it showed, loud and clear as she continually interrupted Romeny(28 times) and Only 9 times for Obama. Crowley can
now be 'back peddling all she wants, but too late–you had NO INTEGRITY, HONESTY, and STAYING NEUTRAL, so
now, you will be known as a "Rathergater".....did the same thing Dan did, in trying to influence a national election in favor of "your guy". No wonder CNN is at the 'bottom of the audience share, with bias like this'
She should not have said anything. Soledad stinks and should not be a reporter. Does not know how to be inpartial, she should start wearing her FOrward pin on the air. We all know what she wants more than anything.
Crowley should be covering the local flower show after her performance on Tuesday night. She is nothing more thatn a political hack for the left as is Soledad. Even the questions she chose were geared to help Obama look better. For instance, what was up with the George Bush question; that man has not been in office for 4 years, but I am sure it was selected because Candy buys into the Obama BS that everything is still all President Bush's fault. I think it is time that CNN own up to their leftest leanings. Nothing fair or balanced in any of their political reporting at all.
she lost all her creditablity she should be fired we know were she stands so we cannot trust her to be natural on any issue as a news person and i think she is no longer usefull she done her job for the obama so let him hire her she just screwed america
Crowly not only was out of line, she had questioned the validity of the original responses in her previous reports–this amounts to LYING! CNN brass backed her up yesterday. This is not reporting of the news. I will no longer watch CNN as I want truthful reporting and not a bunch of SPIN. IN 2004 I stopped watching MSNBC for the same reason. GODBYE!
Why does Candy still have a job?
I think these guys NEED to be called out real time whenever suitable. Voters need to be making informed decisions, not decisions based on what Fake News says.
Bottomline, Candy Crowley was out of line. She sidestepped the required impartiality, proved her inability to be truly professional at a moment which absolutely required it. She has proven her bias. She should be given no more airtime.
Coolness does not a great president make....re. Obama
The point is, Kaleb, the questions were supposed to come from undecided voters.
why are my comments still awaiting moderation and not posted?
is it because they were critical of candy and pointed out she was wrong...............wrong for butting in, wrong for offering her opinion in a debate that didn't involve her, and wrong for backing obama when it's clear he said one thing but is now claiming to say another?
O'Brien is really impartial isn't she (sarcasm)!!
Why is Crowley still working in journalism? An obviously biased moderator is not a moderator. Let her find a different career.
Ms. Crowley should be dismissed for her bias. this puts Cnn in a bad light, that CNN is biased and not credible.
Before the debate I was so excited that Candy was the moderator. I have always considered her fair minded and intelligent. I was really disappointed that she jumped in to rescue Obama. In the long run this will do her and Obama more harm than good.
He was evidently biased and it showed. Shame on CNN!
Completely inexcusable Crowley! You are a pitiful excuse for a journalist and a moderator. So sad! I have occasionally tuned into CNN in the past, however will never again! I work in a level 1 trauma center and every medical staff member is furious over your actions. BTW obamacare is killing our hospital, we have outsourced 7 department so far! The POTUS will not be getting many votes from us! I hope you are ashamed of your actions, disgusting!
Moderation from whom!
Crowley should be fired for her bias as moderator of the debate and incompetence. O'Brien is another in the legion of Obama acolytes in the media. I guess that is why CNN and these two bimbos are obscure news sources lagging far behind FOX. Also have Crowley eat a few salads.
NO ONE IS SURPRISED WHEN CNN COMMENTATORS SUPPORT OBAMA. THEY HAVE ALWAYS DONE SO AND THIS WILL NOT STOP. CNN HAS LOST MILLIONS OF VIEWERS AND WILL CONTINUE TO LOSE SUPPORT BECAUSE OF THEIR ONE SIDED VIEWS. SO WHO CARES ABOUT CNN?
MISSPEEP
The question is not about whether Crowley was right or wrong (in this case, she was fundamentallly wrong). The point is the moderator should absolutely never enter the debate to argue in favor of one side or the other. Crowley's credibility went to zero when she did that. She is pulling CNN's credibility down with her.
Soledad,
Obama did NOT say on the 12th that "Libya was a terrorist attack". He said, in a broader context that "America will not tolerate acts of terror" (I'm paraphrasing).
Even if you take the wildly liberal interpretation that he meant "Libya was a terrorist attack", you still have 1) Jay Carney and 2) Sandra Rice go out and say it was video related and 3) Joe Biden during his debate saying "we didn't know". Obama can't have it both ways. He could not have said it was a terrorist attack on the 12th, then have those other 3 things also be true.
The administration didn't want, on Sept 11th before the election, a headline saying "Terrorist attack kills the first ambassador in 33 years".
Forget the exact words Candy said, look at how 65 million people understood her comments. They understood that the President said "Libya was a terrorist attack on the 12th" and "Mitt Romney is lying". When, in fact, the exact OPPOSITE is true.
It's VERY disheartening that CNN will not admit their mistake, apologize and try to correct the record. Instead they spin things to protect Candy on semantics.
Way to go Candy Crowley....you were not only representing CNN but also all professional women. Women of this country should not be worried about Romney they should be worried about examples of women like you. You were given this great opportunity to represent women, show that we are equally up to the job, have the ability to be impartial and in front of all of america you blew it. Congratuations on your performance however career limiting it is for you. I don't know whether you helped President Obama or not but one thing I am sure of is that you will never be asked to moderate another debate. Thanks for all you did during the debate to represent WOMEN as equally qualified for the role.
If Romney supporters, and for that matter, the "impartial independents" think that the whole episode of point blank questioning, dwelling on the issue for long time, and insisting on a narrow question/narrow answer style of debate, it is going to hurt both candidates badly, and especially Romney very badly. Imagine Obama continues to insist for answers from Romney point blank for whole one and half hour of the debate:
1. "Your company was the pioneer in moving thousands of jobs to China. Isn't it right, just yes or no?"
2. "You paid only 14% tax while making 50 millions, while this person "xxxx" ( pointing to somebody in the audience) who is a single mom and who made 50k, paid 17% tax, isn't it a fact?. Just yes or no?"
3. "Your made a statement implying 47% of our countrymen are lazy and irresponsible bums, just say yes or no?"
There can be many more....This line of questioning only makes the debate nastier and makes the politicians wash their dirt, mistakes and inability in public. Nothing positive will come out that..
If Candy Crowley was working for a Republican media, and would have intervened in the debate, disturbing it and skewing it to the Republican candidate's advantage.... I already imagine the tumult, the uproar, the New York Times scandalized postures! Coup d'etat, Fascism, Cheating and other words would fly like missiles, all the networks would overheat, TV and computers would explode of indignation... It seems to me that Obama's verbal grammar is far from being accurate, but for him, no joke, no website, it would probably be racist... In 2008, As many European, I thought that voting for Obama was grand, and was a redemption after the Bush years. This sentiment was based on this (now I know) preposterous idea that electing an Afro-American as the president of the USA would "turn a page", and would allow this country to atone for its racial injustice and divisions. Well, now I am wondering if preempting his race over his records (or lack of in this case), was not a case of "soft" racism on my part, or as the marxist would refer to, a retro-racism.
Incompetence cannot be overcome by race and gender. We were shown the video where Obama had the most divisive diatribe, against the white federal state, we could have known his affiliation, his ideological allegiances...
Crowley was wrong to interrupt, Crowley was wrong to correct Romney, Crowley was wrong to determine that the debate needed to "move along" away from one of the most important topics on the American publics minds. Crowley was also wrong to accept the porition of unbiased moderator when she is so clearly partisan. Crowley was wrong to think that we the people don't understand. Thanks Crowley for further proof that the media is actively supporting Obama.
Question: Why are we so involved with the binder full of woman topic? Why when I see a news item yesterday on CNN that Bain Capital, the company that Romney still owns controlling shares in and directly profits from is shipping jobs to China as we speak. Why have I seen nothing about this story this morning on Starting Point?
I'm a moderate and have voted for democrats and republicans over the years, but I have to say that I find myself being pushed extremely hard to vote for Republicans because of the constant media bias I see on the mainstream media. Ms. Crowley can spin it all she wants, but she should be fired! Unfortunately, she is not unusual. If you just read the headlines on CNN, they are so biased. Often the article doesn't even support the headline, but most people don't read the article. I took several journalism courses in college because I enjoy writing. We were taught to be impartial and tough on both sides. Apparently that is lost on today's media, and I am pulling for Romney because he has to not only beat Obama but also the mainstream media. The debate was simply an example of what goes on everyday in the biased CNN world of "journalism". Even the NFL knew that you can't have a referee that said he was a fan of a particular team referee the game. It's too bad CNN can't figure that out.
The whole thing appeared to be a setup. With the president saying "continue Governor" and then looking to Crowley saying pull out the transcript. Fortunately Crowley had a transcript in front of her and she went right to the word terror and sheepishly stated yes he did use the word terror... although it was about 911 and in general terms and not specific to that incident he did use the word terror. Most everyone in the media is seriously biased towards democrats and especially Obama. Everything posted is in condemnation of Romney. Where is CNN's story on the Libya coverups? I guarantee that if the tables were turned it would be posted all over this website. Where are the stories on the Deficits every year and the failed companies that we lent money to like Solyndra? What about the fact that the president never visits the graves of the servicemen that lost their lives as all other presidents have done but somehow finds the time to have a memorial erected of Chavez. Why is he so quick to condemn freedom of speech in this country as he is apologizing to the Muslim world for a filmmakers actions. He doesn't show the same concern for the Catholic religion in this country. You guys are a bunch of hypocrits.
BIAS BIAS BIAS CNN and CANDY are nothing more than BIAS AND SHE SHOWED HERSELF ALL of it!!!!!!!!
http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2012/09/14/press-briefing-press-secretary-jay-carney-9142012
Administration inaction facilitated the embassy slaughter. Obvioulsly Obama regrets this....but please stop being apologists for the attempted diversion/coverup.
Being "cool" is only one of Obama's faults! We don't need a "cool" president, we need a competent one. This man may find his competency lies more on the streets of Chicago, organizing illegal voters.
So, what is CNN going to do about this terrible "error" by a "seasoned" reporter? I suspect they'll give her a medal and a fresh feeding trough with hopes that the "error" won't affect the network's credibility (ha!). But, the network's continuing slide to the bottom of the ratings makes me wonder why a "news" network would continue to disgrace itself like this. It is more of a puzzle to me than why some people continue to support Obama.
Candy Crowley revealed herself to be the opinionated left winger she really is by her pathetic showing of total support of a President in disrepair! Now, want to know how I really feel? And when that bearded midget, Blitzer, said last night, "Candy, you have made us all proud", i nearly puked! What a loser CNN has become with their slanted "brown" coverage!! jc
Because this was supposedly a nuetral undecided group. It affects the bias in question. Candy couldn't even control her bias when Obama was in the hot seat...wanted to 'move it along' as a revealing gut reaction to her uncomfortable bias and convienently removed a very important topic frim the table leaving even Romney frustrated at the prevelant liberal bias and Obama gleaming in his bias light as he called on his cheerleader, Candy, to give another LOUDER shout for her team. Nice work, ref; you totally changed the balance if the debate. What MEANINGFUL effort will you make to fairly correct this for the candidates, the voters and yourself?
What is really surprising about this?! Spin. spin, spin... Of course Ms. Soledad is going to try and "fix it". Her head is so far up Obama's butt that she has no choice but! It's obvious The "Chubby Woman" can't be impartial. She has indicated so herself.
So, I ask again, what else is new?! Next the Democrats will be saying that it's all Hillary's fault. With the Obama administration, there are no secret cows. Soledad/Candy, hint, hint! By the way, where is Bill Clinton? He defends Obama's lies and failed policies, but will not stand up for Hillary! Hmm!!!
One more question, if I may. How can the Obama zombies continue to defend/support a person (Obama) who has no respect for the American people, whether white, Black, Latino, Jew, etc., etc., etc?!
lol, so for you telling the truth or correcting a blantant lie is being "up obama's butt"?
Candy has joined Soledad O'Brien. I've tuned her out now both will go. It was a disgrace for the first woman moderator to show such bias in a debate. I believe she has put the death knell on town hall debates.
Romney had to debate Eye Candy and Candy. If they think they got over on Americans, they're in for a rude shock.
Too obvious, prepared with the Rose Garden speech in front of her.
Disgraceful
Sir, voters are just sick of the lies, disrespect and inconsistancy of Gov. Romney and the Republicans towards not only Mr. Barack Obama but towards the office of Presidency of this nation. so many of us 47 percenters and others are out voting now as you have probably noticed. Spin that!!!!
Ms. Crowley, whom I've respected as a journalist, unfortunately showed her hand in trying to assist the president at key moments in the debate when he seemed at a loss as to how to respond. The two debaters should have been left to defend themselves without her coaching the president. It was like a judge stopping the trial to help the defense with its case. Ms. Crowley and CNN can and should work harder to be neutral.
You sir are an offensive and trite misanthrophic guttersnipe. You obfuscate the conversation by belitting the educated women that are just doing their jobs.
Wow Jerry. You have no idea at all. I wonder what your mother would say.
"chubby woman"??? that alone shows me you have absolutely NO CREDIBILITY SIR! What is surprising to most of us is that the Romney campaign is politicizing a terrible incident. Go back and check how many attacks our embassies and foreign interest had during the Bush years, they were 7. There were attacks under most presidents. Why are you people doing this? It takes a while to sort through facts and investigate, so why is it an issue whether it was one day, or two weeks?? I was watching tv that night and I clearly recall that there was a lot of confusion because you had the demonstrations against the movie, and then you have the reporting that the Benghazi issue, plus those who burn flags, seemed to have been of different nature, they (Clinton, the news anchors, the President) even called them possible militias, or groups working separately, even maybe on behalf of AQ. He said the next day that he repudiated the actions of those people (I don't recall the exact words, but who cares really??) He sent marines the next day, later the FBI, so why are people making an issue out of this? why is it different if the words were said the next day or not? His actions were clear, like I said, HE SENT MARINES, HE SENT THE FBI, HE SAID HE WOULD GO AFTER WHO DID IT. What else do you want?? I believe people like you are going to find wrong in this president's words and actions NO MATTER WHAT he does or says, and if he speaks clearly, you are going to mud up his words. It is sad...really sad...and it doesn't help your cause. Many independents have run away from the right because of these types of attitudes!
Obama Zombies or Romney Robots. People have the right to vote for whomever they chose. The world is changing, relax. Don't let your fear make you stupid. We will all survive and live to fight over the next presidential election no matter who wins on Nov. 6.
You are the definition of whats wrong with American politics today. It is one thing to debate a candidates personal stances on specific topics (something you did in a disrespectful and cowardly way) but when you take personal attacks on innocent people, you are out of line and may I also point out that "if" you are a republican, you are representing your party horribly. Instead of "low blows" to a candidate or person, try informing yourself on these issues. Reading your comment makes me sad. It is sad to know that civilized Americans can't justify their arguments without calling Candy "the chubby woman" or accusing President Obama for having no respect for the American people? Are you serious? How can people believe all these RIDICULOUS claims about president Obama!? OF COURSE HE HAS RESPECT FOR THE AMERICAN PEOPLE? I advise you to grow up and look at our countries situation in a mature way.
Jerry: 1. I find that so interesting that you think O'Brien is a Dem. I have always felt the opposite. She needs to go.
2. Labeling Crowley as you have done is childish and anti-intellectual. You've negated everything else in your comment. 3. You make statements that Obama lies and respects no one.. yet you do not give examples. A true Romney supporter... walking in his footsteps by making blanket generic statements with no factual basis. Thank you for reinforcing all our opinions about your candidate.
P.S, I am sure he could definitely persuade me to buy a used car from him.
Oh sorry one more thing: Hillary doesn't need her husband or anyone else to "stand up for her". And Obama didn't get her from a binder full of women.
Jerry you are absolutely wrong!!!
well said jerry.
I thought Candy was suppose to moderate, not checking facts as the Candidates speak. If that were so, Candy should have made more than one interruption with fact checking... as there was plenty of bull being thrown around. What's happening to Reporters?
A very bad mistake for a journalist. Why can't CNN see this????? She needs to gooooooooo...........
Candy Crowley is the worst Medeator ever,she was there to help the loser President,but wait! she works for CNN so she's a loser too.
Solidad
Try to protect her. She was biased just like you. Candy should keep her mouth shut and maybe she would not look the way she does
From: Kenneth MacKenzie, Plaintiff Pro Se, U.S. Supreme Ct. 08-9595 : Web Sites:
kristianmenchaca.com/publisher.php ;or: christianmenchaca.com/publisher.php
Ladies & Gentlemen:
It is most urgent and appropriate to cite that the identities several Terrorists who murdered U.S. Ambassador Christopher Stevens and several U.S. Defense Contractors and two U.S. Navy Seals were previously photo-identified in the U.S. Satellite and Drone data bases over Iraq and libya, but concealed from the several U.S. Crime data bases by the U.S. justice , US State, and US DoD.
Thereby, these concealments of Satellite & Drone photo intelligence did criminally compromise the lives of Ambassador Stevens and other Victims of the Terrorist attack on U.S. Consulate in Benghazi.
PREFACE: Incidentally, it is of interest to note: Charlene R. Lamb, Deputy Assistant Secretary for International Programs at the U.S. Department of State did not mention (therefore, concealed by “ommission”) on October 10, 2012 in Washington, DC , that a U.S. Intelligence Satellite was taking photos of U.S. Ambassador Chritopher Stevens every five seconds while he was attacked by al Queda at U.S. Consulate, Benghazi, Libya, U.S. DoD, Satellite photograph Grid coordinates 32 07 N 20 04 E. U.S. Intelligence photo Satellites were recording a photo every five seconds, before, during, and after the murder of U.S. Ambassador Stevens..
Two former Navy SEALs – Glen Doherty and Tyrone Woods – were among four Americans killed last week in Benghazi as part of a security contractor force.
On September 11, they were ensconced in the safety of an annex location in another part of the city when they got word that the main consulate building was under fire and the diplomats there – with an armed force of only nine people – were overwhelmed by the deteriorating situation.
Doherty and Woods, along with other security personnel, left the secure annex and made their way to the chaotic scene, rounding up the consulate staff who were under attack and guiding them back to the second safe building. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-19605322
Deputy Charlene R. Lamb did not mention (therefore, …she “concealed by ommission”) these easily recovered U.S. Intelligence Satellite photos that could be matched against the U.S. Sinjar photos held at U.S. MA, West Point and in the the other KH 11 & KH 12 Satellite photo data bases over Iraq and Libya.
Was Deputy Assistant Secretary Lamb or her counterpart also likely involved in the concealment of Satellite & Drone photo evidence at Benghazi, Libya. Ambassador Stevens paid with his life as a result of said concealments.
: SEE: http://www.theblaze.com/stories/state-department-official-refuses-to-classify-libya-attackers-as-terrorists/# ;;
SEE:: http://news.blogs.cnn.com/2012/10/10/what-we-know-about-the-libya-attack/?hpt=wo_c2
All of the foregoing links to the Terrorist torture murder TRIAL HEADED BY JUDGE MUNTHER RAOUF HAADI IN THE CENTRAL, CRIMINAL COURT OF IRAQ with guilty verdict issued against the Terrorist Insurgent , (1), Ibrahim Al-Qaraghuli, during 18 October 2008 for torture murders of PFC Kristian Menchaca & PFC Thomas Tucker.
… U.S. Col. Rafael Lara and the U.S. Task Force Lara headed and U.S. ATTORNEY GNL. HOLDER & Secretary of State Clinton operated CRIMINAL “EVIDENCE COVER-UP” of (1) Satellite photographs and (2) CIA photos of CIA operated and paid enlistment of Sunni Muslims into the U.S. Created “Awakening” movement : : U.S. CIA AGENT PAID “IRAQI ‘AWAKENING’ AGENTS” TORTURE MURDERED CAPTURED US SOLDIERS, PFC KRISTIAN MENCHACA & PFC THOMAS TUCKER, 2006, IN SATELLITE PHOTOS. The identification of the U.S. paid “Iraqi ‘Awakening’ Agents” in said Satellite Photos can be made by comparing CIA photo Records of its own data base of CIA operated and CIA paid enlistment of Sunni Muslims into the U.S. Created“Awakening” movement. SEE:http://www.israelmilitary.net/showthread.php?t=16167
…This astounding condition was concealed prior to and during trial of (1), Ibrahim Al-Qaraghuli & (2) Kazim Al-Zowba’i & (3) Walid Al-Kartani headed by Judge Munther Raouf Haadi in The Central, Criminal Court of Iraq with guilty verdict issued against the Terrorist Insurgent , (1), Ibrahim Al-Qaraghuli, during 18 October 2008. (2) Kazim Al-Zowba’i & (3) Walid Al-Kartani were released as Iraq had no science available to process DNA collected against (2) Kazim Al-Zowba’i & (3) Walid Al-Kartani.
…The U.S. Task Force headed by U.S. Col Rafael Lara representing the United States and advised with oversight involvement by U.S. Attorney General Erik Holder did not make evidence available that would show that (1), Ibrahim Al-Qaraghuli & (2) Kazim Al-Zowba’i & (3) Walid Al-Kartani were members of “U.S.-CIA-paid-Iraqi-’Awakening’-Agent-Terrorists” of al Queda / al Shura . SEE:http://www.israelmilitary.net/showthread.php?t=16167
..SEE:http://www.nytimes.com/2008/10/29/world/middleeast/29iraq.html?pagewanted=print
…Moreover,“U.S.-CIA-paid-Iraqi-’Awakening’ -Agent-Terrorists” of al Queda / al Shura were Satellite photographed as torturing to death U.S.A. PFC Kristian Menchaca & U.S.A. PFC Thomas Tucker “AND” this evidence, in a corrupt effort at concealment, was not presented by U.S. Col. Rafael Lara and the U.S. Task Force he headed and U.S. ATTORNEY GNL. HOLDER & Secretary of State Clinton to Judge Munther Raouf Haadi in The Central, Criminal Court of Iraq on or before 18 Oct 2008 when he issued what amounts to a “U.S.-GOVERNMENT-CONCEALED-EVIDENCE-’TAINTED’-VERDICT.”
Charlene R. Lamb, Deputy Assistant Secretary for International Programs at the U.S. Department of State, testifies on Capitol Hill as a diagram of the U.S. compound in Benghazi is displayed behind her on October 10, 2012 in Washington, DC. The hearing before the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee focused on the security situation in Benghazi leading up to the September 11 attack that resulted in the assassination of U.S. Ambassador to Libya J. Christopher Stevens. (Credit: Getty Images)
During Wednesday’s House Oversight and Government Reform Committee hearing, Rep. Dan Burton (R-Ind.) questioned Deputy Assistant Secretary of State for International Programs Charlene Lamb about her apparent refusal to call the people who attacked the U.S. Consulate in Libya and killed four Americans “terrorists.”
“You Miss Lamb…have described these attackers in a number of ways but you don’t mention terrorist at all. Why is that? I mean the compound had been attacked once before and breached,” Burton said. “And these people had all these weapons; projectiles, grenades, all kinds of weapons. Why would you call this anything other than a terrorist attack? And why do you call them attackers?”
“I have just presented the facts as they have come across. I am not making any judgements on my own and I am leaving that to others,” Lamb replied, completely avoiding the question.
She said what she said, she was right in what she said.. Period..
Everyone wants to get their little spin on it.. But in the end its on video. Obama DID say it was an act of terror.. And given the timing, and the information,the circumstance.. Calling it a terrorist attack ,Before any group took credit, would have been the 'wrong' thing to do.
So calling it an act of terror was absolutely 100% correct..
Move along folks..
You really can't spin this one..~!!
Candy Crowley shold be demoted for the poor job she did as moderator for the second presidential debate. How much was she paid by the Obama campaign for helping him?
This is clearly a pathetic attempt to cover for the President by grasping for alternative meanings in a vague Nostradamus like reference to terror in his speech and should be seen for what it is. If I was President and really believed it was a terrorist attack, why would I allow a different narrative to continue to be told by those that report to me? Would I then repeatedly condemn the crazy movie that was the foundation for the alternative narrative instead of correcting the false narrative? O'Brien and the President insult the intelligence of viewers to think anyone would be gullible enough to believe that the President really believed it was a terrorist attack the day after this tragedy.
Good god, she acts out of honesty to a remark by a pathological, compulsive liar, and every right wing moron in the country reacts with a twitching and fluttering of its sphincter.
Candy, in trying to move this along..got tongue tied trying to repeat Romney's point and misstated what he actually said (or the point he was making). What she remembered after the show...is not what she actually said in the debate.
Transcript: CROWLEY: He - he did call it an act of terror. It did as well take - it did as well take two weeks or so for the whole idea there being a riot out there about this tape to come out. You are correct about that.
Romney's point was NOT that it took 2 weeks for the idea to come out that it was a spontaneous riot about the tape. His point was that this was the meme the WH was pushing from the beginning for 2 weeks before they admitted it was a deliberate "terrorist" attack. So Candy messed that up. And then cut Romney off as he tried to correct it.
The problem with that is...it's one thing for a candidate to live or die by their own misstatements, etc. in front of 60 million people. (ie., Romney not realizing the "word" terror was actually in the speech). It's quite another to have a moderators misstatement pinned on you. I think, well intentioned as it was...Candy was wrong for getting involved in the discussion for this very reason. And it is because of the danger of such things that it is not a good idea in general to allow moderators to get involved in this way. There is plenty of time after the debate to round table whatever you want, agree with or disagree with who ever you want. But, Candy's assertion after the fact of what she "thinks" she said...is different than what she actually said in the debate. She clearly misstated Romney's point and then moved things forward cutting Romney off as he tried to clarify it.
As to the point and counter point about Benghazi attacks and statements made...I think it's debateable and should have been left for the candidates to hash out and voters to decide for themselves. Candy is not running for president. And with stakes as high as they are, I think it would be the time for discretion and not trying to stick your foot in the door....particularly for this very reason......you may get something wrong or imply something you didn't mean that could have an impact on a candidate. I think Candy (and CNN) need to go back and actually look at the transcript to see this. And not pretend that what she said after the debate...and since...was what she actually said during the debate because it clearly was not.
Ms Crowley, abrogated her responsibility as moderator and is now tap dancing on technicalities. It is sad because I did see her as a serious journalist in a sea of liberal elitists at CNN. Every thoughtful person, except Pres Obamas apologists, recognizes that the president has been playing politics with foreign policy and that it has cost the lives of Americans and jeopardizes world stability and American leadership.
Then to throw a question in there about women's pay?? There are no serious scientific studies that support the myth that women are underpaid. It defies logic. In our free market economy, the only way to demonstrate this, would be to find two perfectly equally qualified candidates, one male and one female, applying for the same job at the same time, each with perfectly symmetrical negotiating skills, who would be willing to disclose thier salaries. Any business operating in a free market will alway pay as little as possible for labor and all other components of it products. No business will intentionally over pay. Shame on you Ms Crowley!!
Once again, as demonstrated by Ms. Crowley, the main stream media shows their bias. She interrupts Romney 28 times and President Obama 9 times. She moves the topic along/covers for the President when he is asked hard questions, ie. "Fast and Furious", the President's personal investments versus Mr. Romeny's blind trust investments, and then she ratifies the President's lie about Libya. No wonder less and less people trust the media and CNN's ratings are so low! CNN should be embarrassed that she is part of their team.
I'm surprised Candy didn't express her love for Obama out loud. When talking about the assault weapons ban, Romney hit on Fast and Furious and was going after Obama on that and she couldn't shut Romney down fast enough. "you need to stay on topic" but when her boy crush got up to respond she let him talk about family and education. Guess that's on topic for assault weapons. Candy was an embarrassment and typical liberal in love with Obama media. No wonder media companies are either failing or their ratings are in the toilet.
Candy Crowley has sadly made herself part of the story.
I've been trying to give CNN the benefit of the doubt with regards to fair reporting.
Cooper has had some good stories lately.
Burnett shows some signs of objectivity.
Most times Crowley will get my ear.
That debate performance though – unbelievably biased.
Example – The weighted liberally slanted questions, the number of moderator to Romney interruptions, the act or acts of terror, and 3 minutes less for Romney to name some obvious things.
Her excuse for the terror debacle "I was trying to move things along" does not mean she did not err.
That her response provoked applause for the POTUS indicates she choose sides on a very arguable issue.
She should apologize to team Romney publicly to hold her credibility.
I'm sorry, but if that does not happen soon it will stain her reputation and the others on that network.
Some say "they don't care about a honest reputation".
I ask CNN or Candy Crowley... Do you?
Candy Crowley you were a terrible moderator. We did not care about your opinions. Your interjections showed us all how you want this debate to go. I think you need to go back to a desk job and remove yourself from the public eye. I would have like to have seen a fair debate,but regardless how you tried to fix the debate the Governor is a class act and showed just how much our president has no plan to help our nation. Shame on your network.
No wonder there aren't more responses. I see after I posted that you "Moderate" all responses. Well, that makes perfect sense to me now. I hope to never see someone like Candy moderating another debate, with the level of unprofessionalism that she displayed last night.
Candy Crowley owes Mitt Romney an apology. I didn't hear it, then or since then.
That was outrageous! C.Crowley served as a Obama supporter,not as a moderater,during the debate.
She even answered the question for Obama. She should be barred permanently from ever serving as a moderater again in the future. She should resign CNN and go to join Obama team as his political spokeswoman.!
Of course Candy wanted to "move this along". She and everyone else paying attention realizes that this Benghazi cover up is what is going to sink Obama. And he did it to himself.
But what else should we expect from a dirty Chicago politician?
Time for Obama to go work for Rahm Emanuel back in the windy city where he belongs.
Very disappointed with Candy Crowley. The public needs honest reporters to insure accurate information is provided to the public. She should have never shown her bias by interjecting anything. I felt sorry for her that she still does not understand where she crossed the line in this debate. We really did not need the first woman moderator in 20 years to blow it. What has happened to the media?
Subject: Debate #2 and Candy Crowley
I used to watch CNN as my favorite news channel but haven't in the last several years with the hard left turn it has taken.
You have lost a lot of good talent: Lou Dobbs, Bill Hemmer, John Roberts, to name a few and kept second and third rate journalists......if you can call them that.
I always liked Candy until her shameful performance as moderator of yesterday's debate. I will never listen to her again. She really showed her liberal bias instead of doing her job. This is considering that Romney debated 2 people, Obama and Crowley. Crowley interrupted Romney 28 times and Obama 9 times.
Obama got 40 minutes to speak, and Romney got 43 minutes to speak. And the most egregious blunder: Crowley took Obama's side on the Libya attack by correcting Romney after he rightly stated that Obama did not call what happened in Libya a terrorist attack until 2 weeks later. Crowley then walked it back the next day, saying she was wrong.
Since when is a moderator supposed to be part of the debate?? This is shameful and just confirms how the corrupt media has shielded Obama for 4 years and taken his side. I would hope that Crowley will never be asked to moderate a debate again.
And no, I am not a Reoublican. I do not like the two party system. I am a Libertarian. and would like to see a strong Libertarian Party in the U.S. But you can bet your bottom dollar I will vote for Mitt Romney to rid this country of the incompetent hack we currently have in OUR White House.
The American people are smarter than the media elites think. In the end, I believe this will backfire on Obama and the media, especially CNN.
We have 20 days to go………………..
A. Hanner
Atlanta, GA
First of all, I'm an independent who watched the debate last night and my observations were based on what I watched. It was frustrating for me to watch how Ms. Crowley handled her job as the moderator. To say that the president won the debate last nigth would be unfair because he had the moderator on his side to help him on questions he couldn't give straight answers. It showed the frustration that Mr. Romney had during the debate. Who wouldn't? Romney was debating against two last night: Obama and Crowley. Her comment above that she wanted it to move along seemed to apply only during Mr. Romney's turned to speak. Her actions spoke out loud what party and/or candidate she favors. She's the moderator goodness sakes. It wasn't her job to help any candidate with his answers. Big disappointment, indeed. She tarnished her credibility and career. What a shame.
Re: Candy Crowley/ @2nd Presidential debate,
Since Ms. Crowley was allowed to determine which questions were to be asked; and, she maintained the right to reshuffle the questions as she thought fit, it was obvious that her political agenda was allowed to receive preferential treatment. Good for her. She outwit, outplayed, and out smarted the vetters from the Republican party. Once again, for a few minutes, CNN seems to have persevered in promoting their "Guy"; and, succeeded in pandering to a voting block of women as well. CNN unfortunately believes that women will lock step with the monocular views of their commentators.However, the opposite is true. The dismal ratings reflect America's view of Today's CNN staff; and, unless a overhaul is undertaken then I would think that CNN will eventually only be watched by the emotionally needy as well as suckling pundits in need of positive feedback. CNN's numbers will continue in a downward spiral until finally...the lights will have to be turned off..
What Candy did was unforgiveable! She interrupted Romney many more times than Obama, she gave Obama more time to speak, she gave her own opinion on Obama and backed up Obama's lie about stating that the Benghazi attack was a terrorist attack. What kind of moderator sides with one of the contestants? She was totally out of line. If she was doing spontaneous fact checking, why didn't she call out Obama when he stated that he had increased the number of permits on federal land. A total lie! There were numerous occasions to correct Obama on his lies, but did she? NO! Instead she corrects Romney and was wrong at a critical time in the debate. She demonstrated why many independents despise the mainstream media due to bias that was aptly displayed by Candy!
I support Obama, but I thought she was way out of line. As a moderator, her job, her ONE job, was to be a neutral party in the middle that simply asked the questions. But she couldn't do that. She bypassed the very point of having a third party as a moderator.
Candy did a wonderful job of keeping the candidates on point. Perhaps she has started a new trend which would not be a bad idea – on the spot fact checking. End the spin and lies.
It really bugs me that Jason Chaffetz is spending more time campaigning for Romney then campaigning in his own district. I know he is from Utah, and his seat is safe, but it seems he has spent more time out of his district then in. While every race in Utah has had debate, his district hasn't and won't either. It is a shame he cares little about the people in his district then it seems advancing his own political career as a surrogate of Romney.
she has NO right to take sides with either party... she should have said NO comment....are you kidding me ? she is supposed to be impartical ...... which of course she was not. She stood up for her her obama, but did not give romey a change to chalenge him. ( which I think the american people should here what his story is ) What a joke with CNN as the sponser with this debate thinking it would be in partial. !!
The fact is she interrupted Romney's response to defend Obama. And made a false statement doing it. We all watched. She wasn't in the debate running for president. She over stepped her position and there is no good, next day excuse. Like it or not she did the unthinkable, never before done running interference for Obama. And not only on the Labia issue. She is a disgrace and for CNN to keep such incompetence on staff makes them a disgrace as well.
Candy was dead wrong both in inserting herself into the debate (she had already clearly lost control of the debate) and with the facts of the situation itself. She should apologize to the Romney camp at the very least. I used to believe that even though she works for CNN, she could be unbiased when needed, but no more. Pathetic for her career.
Obama is a cooler guy? I want someone to lead our Nation out of the trouble we have. Romney has the talent to it Obama has proved he can't. Obama is just some guy that wants to drink beer and play golf. Being cool doesn't get my vote. Crowley's excuse is a bit late and very lame now that she's had time to work out an answer.
I'm a conservative that has been following Candy and watching her help CNN gain creditability with hard questions to not only the right but the left. Fact checking in that position was a huge mistake. It helps that she admits that she was wrong but its after the point.
Up until Obama explained that "Secretary of State Clinton works for me !" How demening.
The ability to manage a debate between a sitting president and a presidential contender was beyond Candys ability. Hopefully this is the last we'll see of Candy Crowley.
Candy shouldn't be mentioned post-debate at all. The fact that she is, clearly shows that she did not do her job.
Gov. Romney should thank Ms. Crowley for throwing a lifeline to Obama. The Benghazi debate now has new legs and the President is gonna have a lot of explaining to do come Monday in debate #3. Thanks Candy!
Why does everything think that only "journalists" can moderate the debates? (I'm using the term "journalist" loosely, here.)
Just wondering.
I'm thinking that SOMEWHERE in this country there's someone besides a news person who could do the job, probably better than the biased news people they always use.
Disgraceful. Undeserved in a democratic republic of free people.
Candy Crowley deserves tarring and feathering except that twenty or thirty roofs would go leaking and a thousand chickens would die to cover her fetid, foul bias. Could there be a more disgusting example of the lie that is liberalism? You'd fire her fat ass, had you an ounce of decency.
But you won't, of course. You'll continue to die the death of a thousand ratings books. Just don't impose your journalistic malpractice on the millions upon millions of Americans who otherwise ignore you in every way possible. Shame on the ugly, ugly bunch of you. And thanks again, Zip, for bringing us all together in a spirit of hope and change.
It was very obvious that Candy Crowley was trying to help Pres. Obama along. She can make the excuse that she was,
"trying to move this along". . .that was not her right. If he is the President of the United States, he should be big enough to answer his own questions. It proves that she does not know the facts and will go to any length to help the crippled Mr. Obama. Including all the times she let Obama interupt and give him extra time, and cut off Gov. Romney.
What do you people at CNN think the American people are doing? We are looking for impartiality and truth.You would get higher ratings if that would be your your commitment.
Candy would have more credibility if she didn't fib after getting caught.
No excuse for her error...not what we should expect from a highly paid professional. She's had her shot and she blew it; CNN would be foolish to ever allow her to moderate a debate again. She just can't control her big yap.
Shame on you Candy Crowley, shame on you!
Candy Crowley ruined last nights debate. I voted for President Obama but Candy's obvious prejudice towards Obama ruined what I thought was a great debate. Never again will Crowley be asked to moderate a debate at any level. I will not watch CNN again.
Never has media bias been more exposed or blatantly obvious than in the debate when Candy Crowley vouched for Obama on the whole Libya issue. It almost looked like a tag team event. "Unbiased" is not a word that fits a moderator like Candy Crowley.
No wonder a recent poll of Gallup stated the following about media in america. I quote, "Sixty percent of respondents to Gallup's survey said they had "little" or "no" trust in the media, which is the first time that stat has hit the 60-percent level."
Read more: http://www.businessinsider.com/gallup-media-bias-distrust-at-highs-2012-9#ixzz29c7fEkJq
I was a news fans of CNN until the debate last night...Candy Crowley was completely wrong by supporting
Barrack Obama on the terrorist Rose Garden question. She was for Obama all the way and you could tell
she was....I have been a life long fan of CNN...BUT NOW I AM THRU with anything to do with CNN....I know you
don't care.......So are a lot of my friends....CNN can sign off the air as far as I am concerned.....