<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8" standalone="yes"?><oembed><version><![CDATA[1.0]]></version><provider_name><![CDATA[LL1885]]></provider_name><provider_url><![CDATA[http://ladyliberty1885.com]]></provider_url><author_name><![CDATA[A.P. Dillon]]></author_name><author_url><![CDATA[https://ladyliberty1885.com/author/ladyliberty1885/]]></author_url><title><![CDATA[Turn Off The Heat, You May Boil The&nbsp;Rice?]]></title><type><![CDATA[link]]></type><html><![CDATA[Post written by Liberty Speaks. Original may be found here.

So  on November 13th,  President Obama, after winning re-election held his first news conference in 8 months.  It wasn't until the eleventh question asked that the attack on Benghazi came up.  The question was not about the lack or denial of security requests, it wasn't about the stand down order from the CIA to the two former Navy SEALS who ultimately lost their lives while protecting the consulate and the annex,  it wasn't about the fact  that the White House had real time intelligence that the attack was pre-planned and perpetrated by Al Qaeda, nor was it about the ignored calls for help from those on the ground who never received that help.    No, instead of all those questions that all of us seem to want the answers to, the question to the President was about the attacks on....wait for it.....Ambassador Susan Rice and the possible nomination of her for the Secretary of State position.  What came next was nothing short of a stunning exposition of playground tactics and a strange revelation.  First, here is the question from Jonathan Karl (video of the comments here):

          "Thank you, Mr. President. Senator John McCain and Senator Lindsey Graham both said today that they want to have Watergate-style hearings on the attack on the U.S. consulate in Benghazi and said that if you nominate Susan Rice to be secretary of state, they will do everything in their power to block her nomination. As Senator Graham said, he simply doesn’t trust Ambassador Rice after what she said about Benghazi. I’d like your reaction to that. And would those threats deter you from making a nomination like that?"  

Now, here is the Presidents response:

    "Well, first of all, I’m not going to comment at this point on various nominations that I’ll put forward to fill out my Cabinet for the second term. Those are things that are still being discussed.

    But let me say specifically about Susan Rice, she has done exemplary work. She has represented the United States and our interests in the United Nations with skill and professionalism and toughness and grace. As I’ve said before, she made an appearance at the request of the White House in which she gave her best understanding of the intelligence that had been provided to her. If Senator McCain and Senator Graham and others want to go after somebody, they should go after me. And I’m happy to have that discussion with them. But for them to go after the U.N. ambassador, who had nothing to do with Benghazi and was simply making a presentation based on intelligence that she had received and to besmirch her reputation is outrageous."

 

President Obama's defense of Ambassador Rice, was commendable, how ever he truly did her a disservice.  He acted like a playground defender of a victim of  bullies when stating that Senators McCain and Graham should go after him instead of her.  Then  basically labeled Susan Rice as a small player in the scheme of things by stating she "gave her best"  understanding of the intelligence that had been provided her, and was simply making a "Presentation" but "had nothing to do with Benghazi".  
KEEP READING ---&gt;]]></html><thumbnail_url><![CDATA[https://i2.wp.com/i1196.photobucket.com/albums/aa402/LadyLiberty1885/TheArticles/susan-rice-hillary-clinton.jpg?fit=440%2C330]]></thumbnail_url><thumbnail_width><![CDATA[300]]></thumbnail_width><thumbnail_height><![CDATA[214]]></thumbnail_height></oembed>