JAY CARNEY: BENGHAZI “IN THE PAST”

That’s in the past.

This is what the White House, through the medium of its * Goebbels-esque Liar-in-Chief of a Press Secretary Jay Carney, wants us to think about an event that happened less than eight months ago. In his words:

” ‘Let’s be clear,” Carney said in response to a question from Ed Henry. “Benghazi happened a long time ago. We are unaware of any agency blocking an employee who would like to appear before Congress to provide information related to Benghazi.’ ”

By saying that the White House is unaware of any “blocking” of people from providing information to Congress about the lack of response to the pleas for help from the besieged, Carney must be trying to avoid admitting that individuals, not agencies, do the thug work. The State Department is obviously not going to go on record as making threats; that is the job of selected members who have been assigned the task. By using the specific word blocking, Carney must mean that no one has been physically restrained from driving or walking to the earlier hearings, the press, or any Congressman’s office. To him, threatening them with the losses of their jobs or promotions or possible prosecution for divulging information that has conveniently been classified Secret would not count as “blocking”.

To paraphrase what regular guys in New York City would say in answer to Carney’s assertion, “I got news for you Jay, everything that has ever happened in the history of the world is in the past. If it wasn’t then it didn’t happen yet.”

I guess that we are supposed to apply a Monty Python and the Holy Grail line of thinking to Benghazi – “Well then, I suppose it was a long time ago. Let’s forget about the whole thing – it was silly after all”.

Unless period specified by a Statute of Limitations for a particular crime has passed, then I believe that dismissing an event as having occurred “a long time ago” (Which also factually false as the attack was less than two-thirds of a year ago) does not get one off the hook. As an aside, I once had an officer who was assigned to my section try the ‘That’s in the past” defense when he was being counselled for a years-long pattern for abuse of sick time (He has been bounced from supervisor to supervisor over a period of time and I saw that his performance failures had not been addressed. My answer was that, if his attendance issues were not in the past, then I would not be counseling him about it because it would not have occurred.

This post was written by

Leave Your Comment