Wahington Post Fact Checker Awards Obama 4 Pinocchios for his Benghazi Claim - Doesn't Candy Crowley Deserve at Least 6!

If Glenn Kessler, the Washington Post Fact Checker, awarded President Obama on 14 May 2013 his highest acknowledgment of Four Pinocchios (see below), for his mega-whopper: Claim he called Benghazi an ‘act of terrorism,’ then Presidential debate moderator (and part-time CNN hack but full time Democrat shill) Candy Crowley’s ultra-mega whopper during the debate is worthy of at last six!


When Republican presidential candidate Romney charged that President Obama failed to call the attack on the U.S. consulate in Benghazi an "act of terror," Crowley decided she would enter the debate on the President’s side. Romney had correctly responded to a question by stating: “it took Obama days to call the Benghazi attack an act of terror” when, for some unexplainable reason, Crowley felt compelled to “assist” Obama by joining the debate on his side and erroneously stating: "He did in fact call it an 'act of terror."

This below Washington Post Fact Check should finally set the record straight and show Crowley for the partisan and less than honorable Democrat shill she is. If CNN were truly the non-partisan news outlet they claim to be, Crowley would have been gone the day after the debates. By keeping Crowley on the air almost eight months after her outrageous debate conduct, CNN has demonstrated how impartial they really are.

As for President Obama, seems there is no limit to his ability to lie to the American public. Here almost nine months after Benghazi and in the face of overwhelming evidence to the contrary, he continues to try and “spin the same yarn.” Seems he adheres to the Stalin philosophy that: “if you tell the same lie long enough, people will begin to believe it." This might be acceptable for a CNN hack but is it for a sitting President?

Neocon COWARDS Like Krauthammer, Kristol, Stephens and Rubin Dishonestly Gang Up Against 2-Time Purple Heart Recipient Hagel's SecDef Nomination

See my below article: Let's ALL Get Behind Former Army Sergeant and Two Time Purple Heart Recipient Chuck Hagel to Be the Next Secretary of Defense! for a full explanation of why Chuck Hagel will be a superb Secretary of Defense but lately I have become increasing incensed by the unfair and outright dishonest venom being spewed against him by the likes of Charles Krauthammer and the other Right-wing neocon columnist arrayed against his nomination.  These COWARDS include the Wall Street Journal’s Bret Stephens, the Weekly Standard’s Bill Kristol and the Washington Post’s Jennifer Rubin.

All these “columnists” have one thing in common.  Unlike Hagel, none of these chicken hawks have ever donned a uniform let alone shed a drop of blood or even a bead of sweat, in defense of this nation!  

To reiterate something I’ve already said, those questioning Former Army Sergeant Chuck Hagel’s credentials to serve as Secretary of Defense should ponder Shakespeare’s famous St. Crispin's Day Speech delivered by Henry V before the Battle of Agincourt to see if there might be a subconscious reason for their bias.

We few, we happy few, we band of brothers.

Shall think themselves accursed they were not here,

For he today that sheds his blood with me

Shall be my brother; …
And hold their manhoods cheap whiles any speaks
That fought with us
That fought with us upon Saint Crispin's Day.

As an old infantry sergeant with two Purple Hearts, Hagel isn’t afraid or opposed to war (he voted for the Balkans, Afghanistan and Iraq conflicts) but he also knows the horrors of it so would only resort to as the last and unavoidable option, unlike his Chicken Hawk neocon critics who “hold their manhoods cheap whiles any speaks That fought with us upon Saint Crispin's Day.”

For those who might attempt to excuse Krauthammer’s draft dodging during Vietnam when he became draft eligible in 1968, the most deadly year of the war when almost 17,000 troops were Killed in theater, because he was he was paralyzed in a diving accident; don’t forget that happened in 1972 after US combat troops had been withdrawn.  Charles had plenty of opportunity to participate in defending his country if he hadn’t been too busy hiding out with draft dodgers and deserters in Canada at McGill University or with fellow draft dodger Bill Clinton at Oxford during the height of the conflict.

If you want to know how I really feel about Former Army Sergeant and Senator Chuck Hagel becoming the next SecDef, check out my previous Blog article!

District of Columbia Homicide Rate Has Dropped Every Year Since the 2008 Landmark Supreme Court Ruling Making It Legal for Law-abiding Residents to Own Guns

Again this year the Washington Post New Years Day headline boasts: “Homicides decrease in Washington region.”  The New Years Day 2012 headline was: As homicides fall in D.C., rise in Prince George’s, numbers meet in the middle.  This year’s article also proudly notes that DC Homicides dropped to 88 in 2012 while the 2011 number was 108, in 2010 it was 132 and in 2009 it was 140.  As it does every year The Post also noted the homicide statistics for the surrounding Maryland and Virginia DC suburbs but again this year makes no attempt to compare the rates among the various jurisdictions.

A cursory analysis of the stats in this article might reveal why the Liberal WaPo avoids any analysis --- could it be because it would clearly demonstrate a dramatically inverse relationship between homicide rates and restrictions on gun ownership? 

Using the US Census Bureau’s latest population estimates, DC with 617,996 people had 88 homicides in 2012 for a rate of 14.2 per 100,000 people. The two Maryland DC-suburbs of Montgomery County and Prince George’s County have 1,861,027 with 78 homicides for the same period for a rate of 4.2 per 100,000. The three Virginia suburbs of Alexandria City, Arlington County and Fairfax County have 1,460,997 people with 21 homicides for a 1.44 per 100,000 rate.

This reveals that a DC resident, where gun ownership is still very restricted is almost ten times more likely to be a homicide victim than a “gun loving” Virginian where gun ownership is almost unrestricted.  Even a Marylander, with moderately strict gun laws, is almost three and a half times less likely to be a homicide victim than a DC resident. Much better than DC but a Marylander is still almost three times more likely to be a homicide victim than one of us “gun tottin” Virginians.

Now I’m not opposed to registration and some reasonable limits on ownership such as terrorists, ex-cons and the mentally unstable but there should be no restrictions on ownership by average citizens – anywhere in the US. There is a “God-given” right of self protection, especially in one’s own home, and a gun is the only way to exercise that right. One has to go no further than right here in our own DC-area backyard to clearly demonstrate that contrary to liberal rhetoric, it is an “inconvenient truth” that “guns actually do make us safer.” Case in point, Virginia has by far the laxest gun laws and the least gun violence of any of the surrounding jurisdictions. Additionally, the DC homicide rate only began declining after the Supreme Court ordered the loosing of DC gun ownership laws in 2008. Is the fact that this dramatic drop coincided with this landmark court decision coincidence or might there be a cause-effect relationship? Could it be criminals are not so anxious to attack law-abiding citizens if they might be "packing heat?"

The obvious message in these statistics - guns make us more and not less safe!.

While we’re addressing restrictions on guns, here’s a riddle for you.  What do New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg, Congressman Gerald E. Connolly (D-VA) and Obama advisor David Axelrod all have in common other than they all three trashed NRA CEO Wayne LaPierre for suggesting to have armed officers in schools to protect children?

Answer:  they all live in Democrat controlled jurisdictions that have ARMED Officers in their schools and two of them, Bloomberg and Connolly, were the local elected officials responsible for them being there!

In a recent press conference Mayor Bloomberg dismissed the plan saying “I think it’s a terrible idea. We don’t need (armed officers) in our school system” but it turns out the NYPD already has 350 armed officers who rotate throughout the school system.  Congressman Connelly describe the idea of allowing armed guards to carry firearms in schools as “reprehensible” and “outrageous” but for his entire time as Fairfax County Board Chairman (2003-2008) he assigned armed police officers to be on campus at all times during the school day in ALL county high schools and intermediate schools.  Chairman Connolly’s actions were consistent with Bill Clinton’s 2000 $60M "Cops in Schools" program.

While we’re at it, here are a couple other interesting (and maybe) inconvenient FACTS:

In any given year in this country there is one child drowning death for every 11,000 residential swimming pools or 550 children under the age of 10 drown every year in our 6 million pools. Meanwhile there is one child killed by a gun for every one million (plus) guns in this country or with about 200 million guns, approximately 175 children under 10 die. This means a child is over 100 times more likely to drown in a pool than be killed by a gun. Hence, banning residential pools is a much more effective way of protecting children than banning fire arms.

In Switzerland, every male adult is issued an assault weapon for militia duty and required to keep it in his home. As a result, Switzerland has the highest per capita rate of guns in homes in the entire World yet is one of the safest places to live. Fire arm deaths in Switzerland is .56/100,000. Compare that to the United States where Assault Weapons are heavily regulated and automatic ones are outlawed and our rate of fire arm deaths is 2.97/100,000 per year. That means an American is 5.3 times more likely to be killed by a gun in the United States than someone in Switzerland where everyone and their brother has an automatic assault weapon. Go figure!

Let's ALL Get Behind Former Army Sergeant and Two Time Purple Heart Recipient Chuck Hagel to Be the Next Secretary of Defense!

Those questioning Former Army Sergeant Chuck Hagel’s credentials to serve as Secretary of Defense should ponder Shakespeare’s famous St. Crispin's Day Speech delivered by Henry V before the Battle of Agincourt to see if there might be a subconscious reason for their bias.

From this day to the ending of the world,
But we in it shall be remembered,
We few, we happy few, we band of brothers.
For he today that sheds his blood with me
Shall be my brother; be he ne'er so vile,
This day shall gentle his condition.
And gentlemen in England now abed
Shall think themselves accursed they were not here,
And hold their manhoods cheap whiles any speaks
That fought with us upon Saint Crispin's Day.

Question:  What do Florida Senator Marco Rubio, Bill Kristol (Weekly Standard), Texas Senator John Cornyn, Bret Stevens (Wall Street Journal), Pennsylvania Senator Pat Toomey, New Hampshire Senator Kelly Ayotte, and Abe Foxman (Director, Anti-Defamation League) all have in common other than trashing former Nebraska Senator Chuck Hagel in an effort to derail his potential nomination as Secretary of Defense?

Answer: unlike Chuck Hagel, none of them have ever donned a uniform let alone shed a drop of blood or even a bead of sweat, in defense of this nation!

Sergeant Hagel was leading troops in combat as a 9th Infantry Division Infantry Squad Leader in Vietnam (67-68) and earning the Combat Infantryman Badge, two Purple Hearts, the Army Commendation Medal and the Vietnamese Cross of Gallantry among other decorations, before many of his critics were even born although some like Foxman, Kristol and several others were certainly of an age where they were eligible to serve with Sergeant Hagel if they had had the guts.

There are still enough metal shards from a Viet Cong mine embedded in Hagel’s chest that he sets off metal detectors in airports and the scars on the left side of his face from another mine explosion a month later can scare young children.  His younger brother Tom was assigned to his squad and the first time Chuck was struck by shrapnel it was his brother Tom that stopped the bleeding and saved his life. During that second mine attack a month later, the roles were reversed and Chuck rescued Tom who was knocked unconscious in the explosion. Seems heroism runs in his family and his father was even a WWII Vet.  Once confirmed, Chuck Hagel will be the first Secretary of Defense with a Purple Heart since Elliot L. Richardson during the Nixon administration.

“Stopping a war is a hell of a lot harder than starting it, and Chuck understands that,” said Bob Kerrey, another former Nebraska senator and Vietnam Medal of Honor recipient. “Sometimes it provokes cries from the right that he’s soft. But it’s just that he’s experienced it, and it animates him.”  Hagel once told a Library of Congress Veterans History Project interviewer in 2002: “thinking to myself, you know, if I ever get out of all of this, I am going to do everything I can to assure that war is the last resort that we, a nation, a people, calls upon to settle a dispute. The horror of it, the pain of it, the suffering of it. People just don’t understand it unless they’ve been through it.”

An independent thinker, Hagel was often uncomfortable at Republican caucus meetings especially when Vice President Dick Cheney attended, as Cheney would give “him the hairy eyeball” but hostility from the White House or party leadership never muted Hagel as his Vietnam experience gave him the boldness to speak independently.  It’s hard to intimidate a combat veteran by threatening to withdraw a committee assignment.  About the only way a Draft Dodger like Cheney could have hurt Hagel was to give him a paper cut while handing him the meeting agenda!

Another example of Hagel’s independence is President Reagan appointed him deputy Veterans Administration administrator in 1982, but he resigned over a disagreement with his boss, VA Administrator Robert P. Nimmo.  He opposed Nimmo cutting the funding for VA programs and his referring to veterans groups as "greedy," and to Agent Orange as not much worse than a "little teenage acne."

Among his defenders and supporters, most of whom are also former military and often combat vets, is IN Senator (and former Navy Lieutenant) Richard G. Lugar, a foreign policy mentor to Hagel who is leaving the Senate.  Lugar calls Hagel “an excellent candidate” and predicts “most senators who served with Chuck would be favorable to his nomination.”

Two top former Republican defense officials also support Hagel.  Former Bush 43 Deputy Secretary of State (and 3 tour Vietnam Vet and former Navy Lieutenant Commander) Richard Armitage, says of Hegal “I happen to know the guy. He’s not owned by anybody, he happens to think for himself, and this apparently causes some fear in some cases. He’s got an unerring bullshit sensor, he’s got real stones, and he doesn’t mind telling you what his opinion is, which will stand him in very good stead in the Pentagon if the president nominates him.”

Retired Air Force Lieutenant General Brent Scowcroft, a former Ford and Bush 41 National Security Adviser calls Hagel “one of the most well-respected and thoughtful voices on both foreign and domestic policy. At an uncertain time in America – with a significant debt burden, a polarized Congress, and a host of challenges facing the international community, I am confident Senator Hagel will provide a vibrant, no-nonsense voice of logic and leadership to the United States.”

Even Washington Post liberal columnist Dana Milbank defended Hagel in his 18 December column calling Hagel’s pro-Israel legislative record one which reflects “an infantry sergeant who isn’t opposed to war (he voted for the conflicts in the Balkans, Afghanistan and Iraq) but knows the grim costs of going to war without a plan… indicative of a decorated military man who, unlike some of his neocon critics, knows that military action doesn’t solve everything.”

Nobody can ever predict how well a Defense Secretary nominee will perform, case in point Les Aspin, or if Hagel will be a good manager during this pivotal time in Pentagon history. With the US Afghanistan combat role ending and budgets shrinking, refereeing the infighting among the services for resources is going to require all the finesse of an NFL Official.  Hagel brings some obvious strengths to the job.  As a Republican and genuine military hero, he provides the “street cred” for executing the Afghanistan withdrawal that only a combat veteran can bring and the withdrawal will succeed only if our military leaves an Afghanistan that can hold together.

Hagel’s military record is surely one big plus.  Rhode Island Senator (and former Army Major) Jack Reed says of Hagel “He’s a guy who knows how to talk to the troops and has walked in their boots. He’s blunt, direct and impatient with pettifogging. In these traits, he’s similar to the current secretary, Leon Panetta, and his predecessor, Bob Gates. And like both of them, Hagel has a temper.”

Hagel will handle the tough, no-nonsense-boss part of the job with no problem but he’s more blunt than nuanced and nobody ever called him a defense intellectual so it remains to be seen how he is at steering Pentagon procurement decisions in this age of technology and officiating as the Joint Chiefs mud wrestle over budgets.  Fortunately, to help him Hagel will have as the Deputy Secretary Ashton Carter who has a wealth of experience at Defense including having served as the Undersecretary of Defense for Acquisition, Technology and Logistics (USD AT&L), the official responsible for procurement decisions.  Hagel will have no problem saying NO to the Chiefs and their logrolling allies on Capitol Hill and with Carter as his Deputy and chief operating officer to help, I’m confident he’ll skillfully manage the complex spending and strategy decisions.

The most formidable obstacle to his getting the job, that I’m comfortable he’ll successfully negotiate, is the array of neoconservative journalists who are ganging up against him and trying to smear him as an anti-Semite despite his votes for the Iran Nonproliferation Act, the Palestinian Anti-Terrorism Act and the Iran Missile Proliferation Sanctions Act. He even co-sponsored resolutions opposing any unilateral declaration of a Palestinian state and praising Israel’s efforts “in the face of terrorism, hostility and belligerence by many of her neighbors.” He also co-sponsored legislation urging the international community “to avoid contact with and refrain from supporting the terrorist organization Hamas until it agrees to recognize Israel, renounce violence, disarm and accept prior agreements.”

The Right-wing neocon columnist arrayed against him include the likes of the Wall Street Journal’s Bret Stephens and the Weekly Standard’s Bill Kristol and they all have that one thing in common I previously mentioned, unlike Chuck Hagel, none of these chicken hawks have ever donned a uniform let alone shed any blood or even sweat, in defense of this nation! 

As an old infantry sergeant with two Purple Hearts, Hagel isn’t afraid or opposed to war (he voted for the Balkans, Afghanistan and Iraq conflicts) but he also knows the horrors of it so would only resort to war as the last and unavoidable option, unlike his Chicken Hawk neocon critics who “hold their manhoods cheap whiles any speaks that fought with us upon Saint Crispin's Day.”

Seems Redskins Quarterback Robert Griffin III Isn’t “Black Enough” to Suite Some!

Criticism of Robert Griffin III (RGIII) not being “Black enough” by clowns like ESPN’s Rob Parker (ESPN suspends Rob Parker) is just further proof of how disconnected most Americans have gotten from their Military since the Draft ended following Vietnam. Without any understand of Military culture, people have no clue about RGIII’s life experience.  RGIII grew up a Military Brat (a term of endearment) of a Senior Army NCO having been born at Lester Military Hospital on Okinawa, Japan and growing up on various Army posts including Fort Lewis (WA) and finally Fort Hood (TX) where his family finally settled down in Copperas Cove, the “Post Town” supporting what is the Army’s largest post.

Growing up a Military Brat myself, when I was drafted into the Army I considered it just a PCS to another base.  Remaining in the Army 30 years, my kids had the same life experience I did, including going into the service while I was still on active duty so I have some knowledge of this subject.

In the Military culture, it’s your Dad's Rank NOT Race that interests other kids.  As a Senior NCO’s kid growing up in the Military culture, I suspect RGIII rarely experience a race problem – when his father retired after 22 years of service, the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff was even Black!  Army Brats ALL speak the same using Military Slang, NOT street slang.  Another example of this “Military colorblindness” phenomenon is Tiger Woods who is also often criticized as not being “Black enough.”  Tiger’s father was an Army Lieutenant Colonel.

My point, the US Military has long been a meritocracy on the forefront of equal rights so those who criticize RGIII’s “Lack of Blackness” are simply ignorant of the essence of Military culture and RGIII’s life experience.

What Should Be the Military Legal Disposition of GEN David Petraeus’ UCMJ Adultery Violation?

As more is revealed about the GEN David Petraeus resignation from the CIA over an adulterous relationship, it is very probable that the General, while still on active duty, engaged in adultery with a female married Army Reservist in clear violation of Article 134 of the Uniform Code of Military Justice. Article 134 makes criminal the act of adultery when certain legal criteria, known as “elements,” have all been met. There are three distinct elements to the crime of adultery under the UCMJ: first, a Soldier must have had sexual intercourse with someone; second, the Soldier or their sexual partner was married to someone else at the time; and third, that under the circumstances, the conduct of the Soldier was to the prejudice of good order and discipline in the armed forces or was of a nature to bring discredit upon the armed forces.

GEN Petraeus has already admitted to the first two elements of the crime and violation of the third, that his violation brought discredit to the armed forces and especially the Officer Corps, is obvious. The first thing every young officer learns is he or she is “always on parade.” That is their conduct is always being watched and the higher one rises, the more this is true. By the time an officer reaches field grade (major), they are constantly under scrutiny and every transgression sets a new standard of conduct, higher or lower, for their subordinates. So what should GEN Petraeus’ “reward” be for his violation of Military law?

To answer this question, it might be instructive to review what happened to the last highly decorated Army 4-Star General that had an “inappropriate relationship” that some might loosely describe as an “extramarital affair” although this General had been separated from his wife for over a year at the time, was in the process of finalizing a divorce, the lady was an unmarried civilian and he had made no attempt to hid the relationship. He was relieved of his command, demoted to 3-Star Lieutenant General and unceremoniously retired from the Army.

He was GEN Kevin P. Byrnes, at the time the Army Training and Doctrine Command (TRADOC) Commanding General, and on 8 Aug 2005, he was relieved of his command for his relationship with an unmarried civilian with no connection to either the military or even the federal government. The General had been separated from his wife since May 2004 and coincidentally their divorce was finalized on the same day he was relieved of his command – 8 Aug 2005.

The General was a popular and highly regarded leader credited with ushering in systemic changes in Army doctrine and training. A decorated Vietnam War veteran, he had commanded the 1st Cavalry Division and the multinational troops in Bosnia, and had been the Director of the Army Staff. He was set to retire that November after 36 years of unblemished service beginning when he was 19 years old so his punishment was “light” and he was allowed to retire at the reduced rank of Lieutenant General or 3-Star rank.

Now let’s contrast that with GEN Petraeus’ behavior (or “Peaches” as she calls him) with Army Reserve Lieutenant Colonel Paula Broadwell. She first met “Peaches” Petraeus in 2006 when she was a Harvard Grad Student and not sure when the affair started but it’s clear she began spending an inordinate amount of time with him by the time he was the CENTCOM Commander in 2009. When he became the ISAF Commander she managed to visit him six times in Afghanistan spending a total of three months with him. She characterized it as being embedded with “Peaches” there but it sound more like “Peaches” was “embedded” in her. Her “cozy” relationship with the General became awkward for his staff who could not understand how he could possibly select a totally unqualified “writer” with absolute no qualifications to write his biography.

GEN “Peaches” Petraeus has been married for 38 years and has two grown children; his son is also a West Point Grad and serving Army Officer. The general is fond of introducing his wife in glowing terms and preaching ethics and morality to his subordinates with his favorite saying being: “Character is doing the right thing when nobody is watching.” Broadwell is a forty year old married woman who lives in the upscale Dilworth neighborhood of Charlotte, NC, with her radiologist husband and two young boys. Like “Peaches” and his son, she is a West Point Grad.

Now Broadwell is a bit of a “nut case” which is how the FBI first learned of the affair which resulted in Director of National Intelligence Lieutenant General (Ret) James R. Clapper Jr. directing GEN “Peaches” that he immediately tender his resignation, turn in his badge, and never return to CIA Headquarters at Langley again!  It is encouraging to see at least this general officer had the moral courage to do the "right" thing although it appears GEN Petraeus was prepared to dishonorably maintain his deception as long as he could get away with it.

What triggered the FBI involvement was it seems Broadwell had gotten access to GEN “Peaches” Gmail account and learned of another woman who might have gotten a bit too close to her “Peaches.” Broadwell began sending her threatening e-mails and the other woman became so frightened by Broadwell’s menacing messages that she went to the FBI for protection and to help tracking down the sender. The FBI investigation traced the threats to Broadwell and the rest is History. The other women receiving the threatening e-mails has been identified as 37 year old Jill Kelley and her "story" is worthy of a whole another chapter is this sordid saga.

What is clear here is that GEN Byrnes’ transgression pails in comparison to that of GEN “Peaches” Petraeus. Byrnes was in an open relationship with an unmarried civilian and he was a stellar officer who was legally separated from his wife at the time and in the process of getting a divorce – but he was nevertheless wrong and he was appropriately punished for his violation of the Uniform Code of Military Justice.

So what should be the punishment for a General that carried on a long adulterous relationship with a female married Army reserve officer and it only comes to light through an FBI investigation? Also, it should be noted that GEN “Peaches” Petraeus did not just “volunteer” to resign because he realized “what he did was wrong” but rather Director of National Intelligence Clapper, himself a retired Air Force Lieutenant General, TOLD him he had to go! To be consistent, the “Byrnes precedent” sets the standard for how to be consistent in punishing GEN Petraeus for his UCMJ violation. Congress should immediately act to re-confirm the General on the Retired List in the reduced rank of three-star Lieutenant General.

While we’re at it, let’s not forget Army Reserve Lieutenant Colonel Paula Broadwell. Not only did she commit adultery but this “nut case” had classified documents on her private computer yet still carries a DOD Top Secret/SCI Clearance, although suspended, because of her Reserve duties. Regardless what else happens to her, her TS/SCI Clearance should be immediately revoked! Also, do we really need to retain in service a reserve lieutenant colonel so unstable as to be sending threatening E-Mails sufficiently menacing as to warrant an FBI investigation? Even though the Justice Department may choose not to prosecute, Broadwell should be immediately cashiered out of my United States Army!

Obama Tells Another Whopper on Univision – Tried to Blame Bush for Fast and Furious! Then Pays Off Univision for NOT Challenging Him on the Lie by Appointing Univision Owner’s Wife U.S. Representative to the UN

Obama Scores Three Pinocchio from the Washington Post for lying at Spanish language TV Interview "I think it’s important for us to understand that the Fast and Furious program … begun under the previous administration… . the people who did initiate this were held accountable.” 
— President Obama during Univision interview, 20 Sep 2012

On Thursday/20 September President Obama appeared on the Spanish-language television network Univision and host Jorge Ramos asked Obama if U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder should be fired over Fast and Furious – his administration’s “gun-walking” operation that allowed firearms to be transferred to Mexican arms traffickers and two of those guns were used to kill US Border Patrol agent Brian Terry. In typical Obama fashion Obama responded with the bold faced lie that the previous administration initiated Fast and Furious and that Holder shut the program down after he found out about it and even worse, in typical fawning press fashion, Ramos didn’t call him out on his lie. Seems there is also a Spanish version of the “Lame-Stream Press” and both are too busy attacking everything Romney says to bother to check any of Obama’s utterances, no matter how false, outlandish, ridiculous or improbable.

Then a few days after the interview when it was revealed Obama had appointed Cheryl Saban, wife of Univision owner Haim Saban, U.S. Representative to the United Nations everything became clear. The “Fix was in” before the interview even started so it should have been billed a campaign rally and not a news interview. (See: Obama-Appoins-Univision-Wife) It’s obvious Obama must not respect Latino viewers because he must believe they are so naive as to believe anything he says, no matter how improbable as evidenced by the fact he also told them during this same interview that the 11 September attack on the U.S. Consulate in Benghazi, Libya that killed U.S. Ambassador Chris Stevens, diplomat Sean Smith and two former Navy SEALs was an outgrowth of the Middle East demonstrations over that American-made Internet video insulting the Islamic prophet Muhammad. He made this ridiculous statement despite the fact Jay Carney, his White House Press Secretary, had already announced earlier in the day during his daily press corps briefing that it was a well planned and coordinated sophisticated terrorist operation and by that time even Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton was calling it a "terrorist attack."

The fact that the attack was carried out by heavily armed extremists using military-style tactics and that they had also steered Americans toward a waiting ambush as they were being rescued would alert anyone with even a passing knowledge of military tactics that this was not a spontaneous demonstration. The Terrorists attacked with heavy weapons including RPGs and broke off into teams to block certain roads away from the compound as the Americans moved to an annex to await relief. Once there, that building came under coordinate mortar fire with projectiles landing directly on the roof of the annex indicating a sophisticated battlefield strategy by experienced fighters with a well-developed assault plan.

But back to Fast and Furious. Last week following his 19-month investigation, the U.S. Justice Department's own Inspector General released his 471-page report and he reported that on 26 October 2009, a teleconference was held at the Department of Justice in Washington, D.C. with Deputy Attorney General David W. Ogden, Assistant Attorney General Lanny A. Breuer, ATF Director Kenneth E. Melson, DEA Administrator Michele Leonhart, Director of the Federal Bureau of Investigation Robert Mueller and the top federal prosecutors in the Southwestern border states where they cooked up this hare brained scheme and Operation Fast and Furious began on October 31, 2009 – some nine (9) months into Obama’s term of office.

In his report, the IG recommended 14 employees, including Assistant Attorney General Lanny Breuer, for discipline in connection with this botched "Operation Fast and Furious" so how did Holder hold his deputy “accountable?” He gave him a complete pass and said he would take no action. Now that’s real “discipline and accountability” and it thoroughly outraged the slain agent’s family.

The Washington Post Pinocchio Test – What did the Washington Post Fact Checker find:

Obama was not telling the truth and “the Fast and Furious program,” unquestionably started during his term as president.

That the operation was DEFINITELY not “begun under the previous administration” and Obama was probably trying to wash his hands of any accountability for a program that was obviously launched on his watch and that allowed 2,000 powerful firearms to end up on U.S. and Mexican streets.

The Post said “we can’t let politicians get away with this sort of egregious factual mistake.” The Fact Checker also noted that this had become an Obama pattern and he had earlier tried to shirk his responsibility for politically hot failures in the past including saying his administration wasn’t at fault for the $535 million federal loan that went to the now-bankrupt solar-panel manufacturer Solyndra when in fact, it was ALL his fault.

The Post awarded Obama THREE PINOCCHIOS for his Fast and Furious lies and noted his factual error that the previous administration was responsible for gun walking and Operation Fast and Furious was Absolutely a LIE! But don’t take my word for it; if you want to see EXACTLY what the Factchecker said, either blow up and read the below graphic or read the actually article at this link: Obama_Tells_Another_Whoppe_on_Univision