Wednesday, April 16, 2014
PLACERVILLE, CALIFORNIA
99 CENTS

Benghazi hypocrisy

EDITOR: Left unsaid in all the GOP and FOX News fevered blathering about Benghazi is the fact that, some weeks ago, Congressman Darrell Issa, R-Calif., literally “dumped” hundreds of State Department and CIA documents, some listing names of Libyan informants working for the CIA and, by inference, confirming that the “Consulate Building” was actually the center of CIA activities for the area.

Issa has blood on his hands: There’s no sugar-coating that fact. So let’s hear it from the MD’s editorial page on the great job Issa is doing. The hypocrisy is sickening.

JOHN GARON
Placerville

Letters to the Editor

LEAVE A COMMENT

Discussion | 163 comments

  • Phil VeerkampNovember 07, 2012 - 7:54 pm

    John, can you provide a link to the documents as well as a link to the Issa document dump story . . . . one/both?

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • Phil VeerkampNovember 07, 2012 - 7:57 pm

    By any chance did all this take place in the Home Depot parking lot, John?

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • prime timeNovember 07, 2012 - 8:12 pm

    Issa’s Benghazi document dump exposes several Libyans working with the U.S.

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • prime timeNovember 07, 2012 - 8:14 pm

    166 pages of sensitive but unclassified State Department communications posted by Issa

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • prime timeNovember 07, 2012 - 9:14 pm

    Republicans Tip world off to covert CIA Role in Libya

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • prime timeNovember 07, 2012 - 9:22 pm

    "Dear Professor Cole, it is very interesting that the continuing pressure on the Benghazi story has now led to the revelation that there is a concerted effort by the US government to funnel arms from Libya to Syria to support the rebels there. The large CIA presence in Benghazi and Ambassador Stevens’ meetings with Turkish representatives that night are both linked to the secret arms smuggling operations. I think US citizens are better off knowing what is being done in their name. You have eloquently written yourself about the dangers from flooding Syria with weapons. Do you apprecaite that this story is coming out now?"

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • Phil VeerkampNovember 07, 2012 - 11:40 pm

    prime time It is late. I'll put together the links tomorrow to show that the CIA/UMA brigade/SYRIA/LYBIA "operation" was public domain info WEEKS prior to your assertion that "the REPUBLICANS" are blowing a covert opps. The NYT was first to the chase. . . then THE NYT became "mute". You're late to the chase, prime. SOME CONTEXT - about 7 1/2 min in - LINK 9-27-2012, 9:00PM ET - Batchelor

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • observerNovember 08, 2012 - 8:25 am

    A larger question concerns the CIA's ongoing destabilization of other countries and funneling arms through Benghazi to Syrian rebels. Legit?

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • Phil VeerkampNovember 08, 2012 - 8:59 am

    observer - Exactly. Add in al qaeda revenge over key targeted killings. . . . which opened the door to the "we brought it on ourselves" argument prior to election.

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • James E.November 08, 2012 - 10:14 am

    Mr. Veerkamp, wonder why the locals continually rag on Mr. Garon? He served the United States during a long distinguished career at the State Department -- a man to be respected rather than denigrated. When he reported he had been verbally assaulted in El Dorado County over his politics, several of our distinguished citizens have poo pooed his reports indicated he has make it up. Do you suggest there are not enough jerks in the local area, and therefore his reports are not true? Every area has jerks, so they are not in short supply around here. By the way, if you haven't heard Dee and Cookie 65, President Obama won.

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • Unadultrated IncompetenceNovember 08, 2012 - 10:48 am

    The first mandate is to ensure the safety and well being of your personnel. We(all of us) sent the Ambassador into an unstable Muslim country after the risk assesment said it was unsafe. We then allowed the Libyan army to protect our personnel. Attacks started. Further risk assesments suggested that the Ambassador was in danger. The Brits and Red Cross withdrew. September 11 arrives and no additional protection was given to the Ambassador. Here in the U.S., the F.B.I. is alerting all law enforcement to be aware of the increased activity on Sept.11 as jit does every year. Sometimes we need to send personnel in harms way but we usually try to provide security and have extraction plans in case it all falls apart. We, the public, need to have a full accounting of what wrong and why. It is our responsibility to demand and explanation.

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • Phil VeerkampNovember 08, 2012 - 11:21 am

    Colonel, Mr. Garon is wrong. Whether inadvertently or deliberately, he is wrong when he says, “Issa has blood on his hands: There’s no sugarcoating that fact.” The New York Times broke the CIA connection November 26th. The NYT text has “vanished”. Here is a link (there are many) to the article - LINK - FreeRepublic link to NYT - Deadly Libya Attack a Major Blow to CIA - Here is a link to the “memory hole” - LINK - Deadly Libya attack a major blow to CIA efforts - If Mr. Garon’s work product in retirement is reflective of his service at the State Department then much is explained.

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • Phil VeerkampNovember 08, 2012 - 11:24 am

    Colonel, Mr. Garon is wrong. Whether inadvertently or deliberately, he is wrong when he says, “Issa has blood on his hands: There’s no sugarcoating that fact.” The New York Times broke the CIA connection November 26th. The NYT text has “vanished”. Here is a link (there are many) to the article - LINK - FreeRepublic link to NYT - Deadly Libya Attack a Major Blow to CIA - If Mr. Garon’s work product in retirement is reflective of his service at the State Department then much is explained.

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • Phil VeerkampNovember 08, 2012 - 11:26 am

    - Here is a link to the “memory hole” - LINK - Deadly Libya attack a major blow to CIA efforts -

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • James E.November 08, 2012 - 11:27 am

    Mr. Veerkamp, we all have our opinions. In this case, I'm going with Mr. Garon. Perhaps in the future, I'll side with you for balance.

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • Phil VeerkampNovember 08, 2012 - 11:37 am

    Colonel, while you are considering opinion there is information to digest - here is some information from 9/13/12 - LINK - jbs_091312a_Bengazi__EARLY_BREAKING_BLOWBACKmp3

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • Phil VeerkampNovember 08, 2012 - 11:50 am

    more early reporting - 9/13/12 - LINK - jbs_091312b_BENGAZI -LieLieLiemp3

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • James E.November 08, 2012 - 1:18 pm

    Mr. Veerkamp, I went to the link you provided and it was a radio talk host in Montana. Given that the talk host never served in the State Department, nor does he have clearances to know classified information, I know you will understand my not listening to his speculation as a basis for my opinions. Slightly off topic, but relating to speculation, I wish my Tea/Republican friends would stop getting their information from Fox News, as in Romney will win in a landslide. Obama 332 EV, Romney 206 EV. A landslide, but in the wrong direction for Fox listeners.

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • Phil VeerkampNovember 08, 2012 - 2:49 pm

    Apologies, Colonel, for my not allowing for your ignorance. Mr. Batchelor normally broadcasts from WABC in New York. LINK - The John Batchelor Show radio news magazine. Based at WABC radio in New York It is not uncommon for Mr. Batchelor to broadcast from California’s Hoover Institute or various other “think tanks” across the nation . . . even from Europe. He’s quite mobile. I should have anticipated that you might be dismissive of a voice from Montana. . . . Rural rubes . . . so judgmental, Colonel!!!

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • Phil VeerkampNovember 08, 2012 - 3:27 pm

    FYI LINK - Archive of Batchelor mp3s back to January On the off chance that anyone is interested in original reporting scroll down to his 9/11/12 programs broadcast at 9:00, 10:00, 11:00, & 12:00 ET

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • prime timeNovember 09, 2012 - 1:13 pm

    SAME OLD STORY - CIA Allegedly Using Drug Money to Overthrow Ecuador President

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • James E.November 09, 2012 - 1:21 pm

    Breaking news: Head of CIA resigns because of an affair.

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • Phil VeerkampNovember 09, 2012 - 2:12 pm

    . . . strictly gut/hunch feeling . . . David Petraeus decided he will not lie for Obama any more . . . we shall see

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • observerNovember 09, 2012 - 2:26 pm

    You gotta be kidding! No way an affair is the real reason for Petraeus' resignation. More likely, his Benghazi Congressional testimony previously scheduled for next week. Now Petraeus won't be testifying. (In the meantime, the col. once again successfully distracts.)

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • DeeNovember 09, 2012 - 2:43 pm

    Petraus resigned because of an affair? Give me a break! That is almost required behavior for a Democrat!

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • Phil VeerkampNovember 09, 2012 - 3:22 pm

    Observer, Petraeus is playing Br'er Rabbit wrt testimony?

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • James E.November 09, 2012 - 4:18 pm

    I don't know if he had an affair or not, and if that was a reason to leave government there would probably only be about 10 people left in DC. However, at the CIA having an affair at the level of the Director, an affair would be reason to leave because of blackmail possibilities. Is this a ploy to avoid testimony? Anything is possible, but I doubt it -- he could have resigned for ill health (it has been reported he has/had prostate cancer). During my time the Director couldn't testify about Iran/Contra because of a rapid death from brain tumor. I still suspect he is living up in the hills near Lake Tahoe fully staffed by CIA subordinates.

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • James E.November 09, 2012 - 4:22 pm

    Mr. Veerkamp, that gut/hunch feeling? Same one that told you Mitt would win?

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • Phil VeerkampNovember 09, 2012 - 4:26 pm

    long shot speculation of the year - - - Petraus, Petraus's biographer, and Petraus's wife have "constructed" this affair. Petraus will now be free to offer shattering testimony. MSM will HAVE to cover Benghazi now that there is sex in the mix. Movie out by 2014.

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • Phil VeerkampNovember 09, 2012 - 9:12 pm

    http://www.businessinsider.com/paula-broadwell-david-petraeus-biographer-daily-show-interview-2012-11

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • prime timeNovember 10, 2012 - 10:49 am

    CNBC: BENGAHZI IS NOT ABOUT LIBYA! "It's An NSC Operation Moving Arms & Fighters Into Syria"

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • Phil VeerkampNovember 10, 2012 - 4:07 pm

    Colonel, if you follow prime time's link it will be reaffirmed to you that John Batchelor is a bit more than a Montana country gomer radio rube. Thank you, prime time. When I listened to Petraus' initial testimony I felt strongly that it was somebody else's words comingt out of his mouth. Petraeus is pi$$ed. Watch out. Revenge is a dish best served cold . . . Expect Monday's Batchelor show to focus on this issue . . . good reporting . . .listen here - LINK - John Batchelor show - 6pm PST - LIVE

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • James E.November 10, 2012 - 5:25 pm

    Mr. Veerkamp, he's more that a radio talk host? Just tell me, what is his claim to fame? Former CIA with service in Lybia? Well, probably not. Tell me because I doubt if I listen to his radio show he is going to spend time telling me who he is -- educate me.

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • laughingNovember 10, 2012 - 5:54 pm

    Col L, youre a real hoot. Sure. The CIA's mission is to keep us informed. Hah!

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • Phil VeerkampNovember 10, 2012 - 7:46 pm

    Colonel, I attempted to satisfy your desperate plea, "educate me", further up this same thread - November 08, 2012 - 2:49 pm. You may be uneducable, Colonel. Or you may have missed it. Which is it Colonel. ? Or do you simply like to prattle?

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • laughingNovember 10, 2012 - 8:19 pm

    Mr Veercamp, theres one posibility you left out. Col Ls fame and fortune was black ops. Some things never change.

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • JethroMcSwiftNovember 10, 2012 - 8:28 pm

    John Batchelor is my brother.

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • geezerNovember 10, 2012 - 9:28 pm

    Family Jewels

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • James E.November 10, 2012 - 9:29 pm

    Laughing, where did I say the CIA's mission is to keep the public informed? Ludicrous on its face.

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • James E.November 10, 2012 - 9:32 pm

    Mr. Veerkamp, you said he is more than a radio host. I'm asking what is the "more?" I can understand your explanation -- try me.

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • James E.November 10, 2012 - 9:39 pm

    ADDED: Beyond being a conservative radio host, why should I see him as an authority on what happened in Libya? Again, be specific, I can understand your language. Prattle at me.

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • Phil VeerkampNovember 10, 2012 - 11:31 pm

    Colonel,the merits of the program are not so much a function of John Batchelor’s intellectual heft, impressive in its own right, as they are founded in the broad spectrum of his guests’. From six years ago – heavily excerpted NYT article . . .LINK - He Takes the Shout Out of Talk Radio. . . For Mr. Batchelor, a former novelist, there is a good reason for the show's global perspective. In his world, segments on the show are not so much "reports" or "interviews" as they are "chapters" in what Mr. Batchelor considers the larger story of the United States in a post-9/11 world. The show first went on the air the day after the attack on the World Trade Center. At the time, Mr. Batchelor had been appearing on a weekend radio show on WABC as a conservative commentator and conspiracy theorist, delving into assassinations and political mysteries. On the weekend before Sept. 11, 2001, Mr. Batchelor "happened to do a whole night's worth of talking on this weirdo guy over on the other side of the planet called Osama Bin Laden," Among his favorite topics these days is Iran, he said, because "that's the next theater of conflict." "I feel like I'm telling a series of stories every night," he said. "And they're all in the context of telling the story of the war, the threat to the United States, which I think is profound and will last a century or more." On the show Mr. Batchelor rarely hides his own conservative views, but some of his most frequent guests are also his political opposites. Katrina vanden Heuvel, who has been on several times and is the editor of The Nation magazine, said she thought the show was "an antidote to the trivialization of news and the classic talk radio format." "Though I disagree with him about 90 percent of the time, he has had me on and he's respectful of my views," she said of Mr. Batchelor. "He lets me speak my piece, which you can't say about many of our media formats today." . . . Mr. Batchelor's show has enjoyed the rare distinction of being a source of sophisticated — and at times impossibly erudite — political debate and quirky subject matter. Mr. Batchelor, 57, has described his show as the BBC without British accents, but others in the world of talk radio have referred to it as NPR on drugs. A typical episode combines world news reports with interviews of guests who are almost always in another time zone and tend to run the gamut from foreign correspondents to leaders of militant groups in the Middle East, like Hamas and Islamic Jihad. . . He reads up to five books a week, he said, and can often be found at the studio hours before show time each night, taping interviews with guests across the world in later time zones. "A lot of the senior terrorist leaders apparently are early to bed, early to rise," said Ms. Mason, the producer. . .Despite his rigorous schedule, Mr. Batchelor, a graduate of Princeton and the Union Theological Seminary, "It's so much more exciting to interview terrorists than American politicians, who never, ever have anything interesting to say," Mr. Batchelor explained."This is an audio experience," Mr. Batchelor said. "Providing as many different voices, and as many different accents, and as many different points of view of the same story as possible gives the listener the feeling, correctly, that whatever we're covering is a global event."

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • James E.November 10, 2012 - 11:43 pm

    Mr. Veerkamp, thank you for your brief on Mr. Batchelor. He seems to be a distinguished conservative spokesperson.

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • EvelynNovember 11, 2012 - 8:16 am

    HOUSE ASKS U.S. SEC OF STATE HILLARY CLINTON TO TESTIFY ON BENGHAZI, BUT SHE DECLINES DUE TO “SCHEDULING CONFLICT” @ http://washingtonexaminer.com/house-asked-clinton-to-testify-on-benghazi-but-she-declines-due-to-scheduling-conflict/article/2513151#.UJ_Nz4bpU0G

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • EvelynNovember 11, 2012 - 8:28 am

    November 9: INCOMING LOCKHEED CEO CHRISTOPHER KUBASIK RESIGNS OVER RELATIONSHIP @ http://articles.chicagotribune.com/2012-11-09/business/chi-incoming-lockheed-ceo-resigns-over-relationship-20121109_1_improper-relationship-christopher-kubasik-ceo

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • James E.November 11, 2012 - 9:39 am

    Laughing, special operations was only 2/10th of my career. I was also an aviator (Master Army Aviator), cavalryman (both ground and air), Professor at West Point, General Staff officer, and all around good guy. A little credit on Veterans Day.

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • EvelynNovember 11, 2012 - 1:25 pm

    Steve Pieczenik may be known to one or more at this site. His biography includes: [He] was deputy assistant secretary of state under Henry Kissinger, Cyrus Vance and James Baker. His expertise includes foreign policy, international crisis management and psychological warfare. He served the presidential administrations of Gerald Ford, Jimmy Carter, Ronald Reagan and George H.W. Bush in the capacity of deputy assistant secretary. In 1974, Pieczenik joined the U.S. State Department as a consultant to restructure its Office for the Prevention of Terrorism. In 1976, Pieczenik was made deputy assistant secretary of state for management. At the State Department, he served as a "specialist on hostage taking.” ********** Regarding Benghazi and the sacking of General Petraeus, Mr Pieczenik has written THE THIRD SOFT MILITARY COUP @ http://pieczenik.blogspot.com/2012/11/the-third-soft-military-coup-general.html

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • Phil VeerkampNovember 12, 2012 - 7:51 pm

    TOO MUCH FUN!!! - from the WallStJournal LINK - However, supervisors soon became concerned that the initial agent might have grown obsessed with the matter, and prohibited him from any role in the investigation, according to the officials. One official said the agent in question sent shirtless photos to Ms. Kelley well before the email investigation began, and FBI officials only became aware of them some time later. Eventually, supervisors told the agent he was to have nothing to do with the case, though he never had a formal role in the investigation, the official said.

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • James E.November 13, 2012 - 12:03 am

    I just want to go on record stating that I did not send emails or shirtless photos to either Ms. Broadwell or Ms. Kelley. I now see that General Allen is also involved. Question: When do these generals have time to do general work?

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • Phil VeerkampNovember 13, 2012 - 5:10 am

    Colonel of truth?

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • EvelynNovember 13, 2012 - 5:18 am

    About time to ask: "What's REALLY going on?" ********** TOP U.S. COMMANDER IN AFGHANISTAN UNDER INVESTIGATION, SCANDAL WIDENS @ http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/11/13/us-usa-petraeus-investigation-idUSBRE8AC05Z20121113

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • EvelynNovember 13, 2012 - 5:28 am

    Robert Baer: “There are 4 or 5 CIA directors that I know who were carrying on extramarital affairs while they were director. The FBI was never brought in.”

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • EvelynNovember 13, 2012 - 6:03 am

    STATE OF FLUX: a) The Secretary of State is too busy to testify. b) General Alan (Afghanistan) under investigation; c) The anointed Lockheed CEO forced to resign; d) Pieczenik speculating about a coup; e) General Ham (AFRICOM), “stepping down”; f) Rear Adm. Charles Gaouette (replaced).

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • EvelynNovember 13, 2012 - 6:43 am

    Say it ain't so: JANE HARMAN BEING CONSIDERED TO HEAD CIA DESPITE CONNECTION TO ISRAEL-AIPAC SPY SCANDAL @ http://mycatbirdseat.com/2012/11/jane-harman-being-considered-to-head-cia-despite-connection-to-israel-aipac-spy-scandal/

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • Phil VeerkampNovember 13, 2012 - 7:05 am

    Evelyn, add to Pieczenik’s impressive curriculum vitae the following, ” In 1992, Pieczenik told Newsday that in his professional opinion, President Bush was "clinically depressed". As a result, he was brought up on an ethics charge before the American Psychiatric Association and reprimanded. He subsequently quit the APA. . . He calls himself a "maverick troublemaker. You make your own rules. You pay the consequences." . . . On May 3, 2011, radio host Alex Jones aired an interview in which Pieczenik claimed that Osama Bin Laden had died of Marfan syndrome in 2001 shortly after the September 11 attacks, and that the attacks on the United States on 9/11 were part of a false flag operation by the American government. . . On October 20, 2011 in an interview with the Alex Jones, where Pieczenik claimed that Libyan leader Muammar Gaddafi is alive and said "There’s no way they killed Muammar Gaddafi, that’s not our operating mode and I’ve been involved in 30 years with the takeouts and regime changes." He also slammed President Barack Obama by calling him an "obsessional pathological liar". . . On September 16, 2012, during an interview with Alex Jones, Pieczenik stated that Israel planned to initiate war with Iran during Yom Kippur 2012, unless ex-Mossad and ex-Shin Bet agents assassinated Benjamin Netanyahu. Neither prediction came to pass.” . . . . IMPRESSIVE CVs CAN LEAD ONE ASTRAY. . . LINK - Pieczenik’s Controversies

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • Phil VeerkampNovember 13, 2012 - 7:15 am

    LINK - Another impressive CV - . . . Ph.D. (Anthropological Psychology), University of California, Davis, 1984 . . . M.S.W. (Social Work), University of California, Berkeley, 1971 . . . M.S.Ed. (Educational Administration), Fordham University, New York City, 1966 . . . M.S.(Cand.) (Religious Education), Saint John's Seminary, Camarillo, CA, 1964 . . . B.A. (Philosophy), Saint John's College, Camarillo, CA 1961 . . . president of the Sacramento Valley Psychological Association. . . chairman of the Calaveras County Board of Education . . . board member of the Marin Municipal Water District

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • James E.November 13, 2012 - 8:29 am

    Mr. Veerkamp, absolute truth. Who is stupid enough to write compromising emails in a world where everyone (NSA) is listening? Also, I've noted in news comments that General P would have been asked on the polygraph if he was having an affair. I'm dated, but when I took the CIA polygraph in 1982, the only sex question was whether I "liked" men, and I was surprised they didn't ask me if I "liked women" outside my marriage. But, on reflection, perhaps they realized they wouldn't get many hires if they did.

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • EvelynNovember 13, 2012 - 8:46 am

    James E: I've missed a beat. What is/was the "absolute truth"? (If it's about an affair/not an affair, then I really don't care. That can't be the issue.)

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • James E.November 13, 2012 - 9:20 am

    Evelyn, absolute truth that I didn't send emails to the two ladies involved with General P.

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • EvelynNovember 13, 2012 - 9:23 am

    Ah!!!!

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • Bill E.November 13, 2012 - 9:41 am

    The stink of Benghazi does not wash off. Clinton heavy handiness at work with Panetta "research" currently in motion. The question still remains: What is being covered up?

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • EvelynNovember 13, 2012 - 2:54 pm

    Bill, what is being covered up most likely never will be fully known. Though partial revelations will follow, they will be PARTIAL, intended to divert our attention from the core. Major General Smedley Butler’s 1934 story is instructive. ********** Phil, I take your point about not putting overly much stock on CVs. But does that mean they can be totally disregarded? However, for the sake of discussion, remove Pieczenik from my 6:03 am comment. Lots of interesting coincidences!!!

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • Phil VeerkampNovember 13, 2012 - 3:48 pm

    RE: CVs - I am simply pointing out that the internet is absolutely awash with extraordinary assertions, theories and alternate histories that frequently stand on interlocking circular logical fallacies referencing and supporting each other by people with impressive CVs. It is nearly impossible to distinguish between the claptrap of the demented the pranksters and the jokesters on the one hand and the deliberate disinformation mills on the other.

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • EvelynNovember 13, 2012 - 3:56 pm

    Yes, using the internet as a resource requires experience and discernment similar to that for surveying any other media, whether in a bookstore, newsstand, TV, radio, etc. What reliable information do we bring with us, and are we aware of our biases and limitations? What are our building blocks and vulnerabilities?

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • Phil VeerkampNovember 14, 2012 - 7:27 am

    Bill E., further up this thread at November 09, 2012 - 3:22 pm I mused, "Petraeus is playing Br'er Rabbit wrt testimony?" We now find that General Petraeus will voluntarily testify this Friday. The briar patch awaits. Here I’m going strictly on my gut – We will get the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth. My reading on the good general is as follows. General Petraeus’ personal code of honor is insulted by two recent events, his infidelity to his wife and his infidelity to the truth on September 17th when he spoke “the party line(lie). We shall see. To the extent that the truth can be known it will be known. On faith I believe General Petraeus is an honorable man. To the extent that his honor can be salvaged he will go “all in”.

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • Phil VeerkampNovember 14, 2012 - 8:06 am

    correction - September 14th.

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • Phil VeerkampNovember 14, 2012 - 12:32 pm

    Colonel - All - See if you can come up with 30 min or so to listen to last night's 10:00 PM segment of Batchelor - just to gain context into this "Tom Clancy" developing story - LINK - Tuesday, 11/13/12 - Batchelor 10pm - Guests - Larry Johnson, Bill Roggio, Steve Cohen

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • prime timeNovember 14, 2012 - 2:00 pm

    Rep. Trey Gowdy Explodes At Libya Hearing: 'I Want To Know Why We Were Lied To': Gowdy quoted Rice as saying, "Our current assessment is that what happened in Beghazi was...in fact, initially a spontaneous reaction" to an anti-Muslim YouTube video. "I don't know what the phrase "in fact" means in diplomatic legalese. I can tell you what it means in a court room, it means it's a fact," Gowdy proclaimed. "I would like to have another hearing where we can ask Ambassador Rice, under oath, who told you what when. You are going to blame the intelligence committee? You come before this committee and you tell us who told you it was video!"

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • prime timeNovember 14, 2012 - 2:16 pm

    Benghazi Is Sinking The US Ship Of State

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • prime timeNovember 14, 2012 - 2:38 pm

    Petraeus indiscretion may be linked to "October Surprise" plot: Although it is too early to ascertain why the FBI was investigating Broadwell, there is some informed speculation from intelligence professionals that the Mitt Romney campaign had inside help in arranging for a Jimmy Carter-like "October Surprise" to deny Obama a second term.

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • prime timeNovember 14, 2012 - 4:14 pm

    Petraeus Affair: Chinese perspective

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • Phil VeerkampNovember 21, 2012 - 8:01 pm

    Yippee!!! Garon’s claptrap finally gets published on 11/23/2012, 16 days after submission. Whew! This story is “ripening“ well. prime time, that Romney October surprise thing? . . . a real hoot! EDITOR - How many more Garons are "in the hole"?

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • Phil VeerkampNovember 21, 2012 - 8:39 pm

    LINK - Monday, 11/19/12 - Batchelor 9pm - 19 minutes into the 40 minute segment – discussion of the New Yorker’s – “Benghazi is a tragedy without a scandal, and Petraeus is a scandal without a tragedy.” Larry Johnson(CIA analyst four years – ranked in the top 10%) asserts, “The heart of what they’re covering up . . . covert operation . . . not CIA . . . was run out of the WH . . . running weapons to Syrian rebels . . . the claim that nobody knows who made the intelligence edit is “just a lie. It’s a flat out lie.”

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • DB SmithNovember 21, 2012 - 9:03 pm

    Phil, Thanks for "popping the popcorn"!

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • Phil VeerkampNovember 21, 2012 - 9:13 pm

    No problemo, DB! My pleasure. . . . . James E. - got drinks?

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • Phil VeerkampNovember 22, 2012 - 9:25 am

    YO! - Garon!!! HAPPY THANKSGIVING

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • Phil VeerkampNovember 23, 2012 - 7:05 am

    LINK - Monday, 11/19/12 - Batchelor 9pm - 19 minutes into the 40 minute segment – discussion of the intelligenge "edits" were an INSIDE JOB - Larry Johnson(CIA analyst four years – ranked in the top 10%) asserts, “The heart of what they’re covering up . . . covert operation . . . not CIA . . . was run out of the WH . . . running weapons to Syrian rebels . . . the claim that nobody knows who made the intelligence edit is “just a lie. It’s a flat out lie.”

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • RichardNovember 23, 2012 - 8:16 am

    Waste of time. Veerkamp is just repeating Fox and other right wing talking points with no background or experience to realistically evaluate them, his comments fall into the category of gossip. The healing and disappointment of losing an election after being told repeatedly that his guy would win seems to weigh heavy on Phil, I wish him a swift recovery.

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • Phil VeerkampNovember 23, 2012 - 11:33 am

    Richard, welcome back! Or were you just goofing the other day when you promised to go away? It’s always a shame to squander credibility, Richard. In your November 23, 2012 - 8:16 AM comment you were 100% mistaken. Your credibility is proportionally diminished. I assume you were referring to my Batchelor link? John Batchelor seldom if ever appears on FOX. He does appear frequently on CNBC. His strength is not founded on his own opinion. Rather, his strength rests more firmly on his vast variety of guests, including such leftie luminaries as Katrina vanden Heuvel. In my most recent link to Batchelor his guests were Larry Johnson, former top CIA analyst and Salena Zito of the Pittsburgh Tribune Review. Farther up this thread I demolish Garon’s silly assertion about “blood on hands”(Issa) with a link to the NEW YORK TIMES. Richard, you are so far off the mark that you prompt the question, “Are you a flesh and blood person or are you an android algorithm that is just a few evolvements up from a monkey randomly punching a keyboard?

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • James E.November 23, 2012 - 11:45 am

    Phil, I don't know if Issa has blood on his hands, but I do know he sure has gone silent since the allegation surfaced. Not like Issa to be quiet.

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • Phil VeerkampNovember 23, 2012 - 12:01 pm

    Colonel, It may be the congressional break. It may be an actual security breach. It could be the calm before a genuine $hit storm. We shall see.

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • prime timeNovember 23, 2012 - 12:02 pm

    Elite Intrigues: It’s Not About Sex, Stupid! In the sphere of tight hierarchical organizations, like the military or the CIA, where the activity and behavior of subordinate functionaries is centrally directed and any investigation is subject to authorization by senior officials . . . the idea that a lone agent might operate free-lance is preposterous.

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • James E.November 23, 2012 - 12:30 pm

    While not probable, anything is possible.

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • James E.November 23, 2012 - 12:34 pm

    I'll tell you what's possible, it's possible I'm about to head out to go see Lincoln. Later.

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • RichardNovember 23, 2012 - 1:28 pm

    Veerkamp, I never promised to go away, it was one of your co-conspirators who concluded that. The intensity of your arguments about Brendisa by link seems to be only matched by the right wing media, the more they scream, the more you scream. Nothing original here, waste of time. I am more concerned about the three California Marines who were murdered in Aug. one week after a wire news agency with ties to Fox news did a story revealing their village and mission. But without a link to President Obama you flag waving right wingers have no interested in that story and its as dead an gone as our young Marines.

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • hey RichardNovember 23, 2012 - 1:40 pm

    who or where is Brendisa?

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • the closest is . . .November 23, 2012 - 1:45 pm

    . . . Brindisa Spanish Foods, London. Richard???

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • Phil VeerkampNovember 23, 2012 - 1:49 pm

    "Brendisa"??? - My speculative "monkey pounding the keyboard" model is strengthened. RE: “. . . . wire news agency with ties to Fox news did a story revealing their village and mission . . . “ Link please? The nature of the “ties to Fox”? I daresay you, Richard, have “ties to Fox”. You do have a TV?

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • RichardNovember 23, 2012 - 1:54 pm

    I guess I started to spell Benghazi the way Chuck Norris pronounces it. Any one up to a game hopscotch

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • hey RichardNovember 23, 2012 - 1:56 pm

    good point there - Benghazi and Brendisa are hard to tell apart.

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • hey RichardNovember 23, 2012 - 2:06 pm

    let's get this straight. You're saying too-well-informed Fox TV must learn to shut their traps?

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • sounds like benghaziNovember 23, 2012 - 2:13 pm

    • Khamakazi, • Tsunami • Colossi • Literati • Origami • Salami • Bhakti • Malarkey

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • RichardNovember 23, 2012 - 2:23 pm

    I would guess Veerkamp that because you’re correcting my spelling you have run out of arguments and have turned to insults. Why is spelling important on a random post like this anyway Veerkamp. I'm not showing this to the queen, I'm not being assessed am I? Go on correct my spelling, I know you want to and it fits your profile as I see it. And get used to people standing up to you Phil, El Dorado County is growing up.

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • Phil VeerkampNovember 23, 2012 - 2:28 pm

    Richard, please, a supporting link to ". . . . wire news agency with ties to Fox news did a story revealing their village and mission . . . “

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • RichardNovember 23, 2012 - 3:01 pm

    Veerkamp, all news agencies have access to the wire agencies including MSNBS, CNN and FOX; you do know how that works don’t you? The story was published according to one of the fallen Marines family members, when I tried to questioned that family member about it he broke down and I wasn’t about to ask for more details. The highlight of the story was confirmed by several of his team mates when they attend a ceremony in honor of the young Marine last week in El Dorado County. With all your vast worldly experience staying home safely employed by EID here in Placerville Veerkamp, do you think the family member lied to me, or that the Special Operation team members made it up or that the family conspired to made up a story. I know this is a tough one for you because there’s no link to cut from, but what do you think?

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • Phil VeerkampNovember 23, 2012 - 3:22 pm

    I think that assigning responsibility for the Benghazi deaths to Fox is cheap, lazy propaganda. Your credibility is NOT strengthened when you now remodel your argument, “all news agencies have access to the wire agencies”. You’ve flipped the source sequence. You now assert Fox’s source is “wire agencies”. AP? Reuters? WTF??? If the Benghazi deaths can be traced to classified material leaking to the wire agencies then WHO LEAKED? Certainly not Fox. They’re too uninformed. They don’t know jack $hit. Right, Richard?

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • RichardNovember 23, 2012 - 3:57 pm

    Veerkamp, I agree that cheap, lazy propaganda and Fox all belong in the same sentence. Fox had equal access to the news wire. Can Benghazi be traced to classified material leaking, you don’t know that answer, like the dozens of other right wing attempts to get something to stick on President Obama. What I do find amusing is how you and your co-conspirators are only seem interested in getting something to stick on the President, doesn’t seem to matter if it right or wrong. If it doesn’t stick you just walk away to your safe little government retirement and no one up until recently would question your credibility.....

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • Phil VeerkampNovember 23, 2012 - 4:43 pm

    Richard, you are mistaken. I have no interest in “sticking” anything on our President. It’s too late. We’re stuck with him. I wish us well. BUT I DO wish to “stick” Hildabeast. Where is she in this State Department clusterf#%k? When does she get to go under oath, Richard?

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • James E.November 23, 2012 - 5:15 pm

    Just some general comments -- when the attack came, I'm sure that the State Department, CIA, and the White House said Damn, this is going to expose the CIA cell at the location that is sending weapons to the Syrian rebels. So, first, downplay it as caused by the video, and not a determined well armed attack against the CIA cell. This undoubtedly was why the Intelligence Community sanitized the information given to the UN Representative. Not her fault, she was reading from the script given her and she had no knowledge beyond the script. Then, politics got into the situation and more and more was revealed. The calls came insisting the American people had the right to know all the details. Actually, while most of us believe we have the right to know all the details, classification sometimes lets us know very little of covert events. It's not the right to know, it's the need to know. Even with compartmented ultra Top Secret clearances you don't get the details of an operation unless you have the need to know. I ran into this many times in the Army when generals were incensed with me because I wouldn't share juicy details with them as they were not on the access list. Now, there will soon come a time when Hillary testifies -- it will be closed door and we will know little of the details because we have no need to know. Those who want to wound her for 2016 will make much noise, but they will never know the details (unless Patriot Issa puts politics over national security -- and there will be consequences for Mr. Issa if he does).

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • Phil VeerkampNovember 23, 2012 - 5:51 pm

    Colonel, whatever level of TOP SECRET status Benghazi HAD is far in the past. The covert operation was blown months ago. The one and only objective now is POLITICAL damage control – all neatly wrapped in “national security”. We are now into the “right to know” arena, James – IMHO.

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • James E.November 23, 2012 - 6:00 pm

    Phil, your position is that the operation has now been blown so we have the right to know. Do we have the right to know the names of the CIA operatives? Do we have the right to know who was getting the weapons, their names and locations? Do we have the right to know sources and methods? No, we have no right to know certain things, only the need to know. And, in fact, we don't know if the operation has been blown -- we only think we know.

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • James E.November 23, 2012 - 6:03 pm

    ADDED: And the entire operation may have been a cover operation to hide the real operation. Peel the onion to get to the real operation, for which you have no need to know.

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • Phil VeerkampNovember 23, 2012 - 6:06 pm

    LINK - off to ABC radio news . . . probably no Benghazi news tonight, but we'll see . . .

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • DeeNovember 23, 2012 - 6:42 pm

    RichardNovember 21, 2012 - 9:56 am My wife and I are both independent voters who gave the Mountain Democrat home delivery the boot several years ago. Making any kind of an informed political decision using this bias publication was impossible and the make you want to gag stories about Ray Nutting intolerable. What ever happen to fair in impartial reporting. I would guess that as a community newspaper that only feeds off half of the community that it’s doomed to extinction. I must admit, I will miss the online responses, murders, and accident reports.. ---Sounds like you left to me.

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • Phil VeerkampNovember 23, 2012 - 7:09 pm

    Shame on you, Dee!

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • questioningNovember 23, 2012 - 7:24 pm

    • Despite Obama’s effusive praise of his brilliant ‘warrior-scholar’ General Petraeus in the past, why did he immediately ‘accept’ (aka ‘force’) the CIA Director’s resignation after the revelation of something as banal in civilian life as adultery? • Why are critical political issues and policy disputes resolved under the guise of blackmail, smears and character assassination, rather than through open debates and discussions, especially on matters pertaining to the nation’s choice of strategic and tactical ‘allies’ and the conduct of overseas wars? • Has the purge and public humiliation of top US military officers become an acceptable form of “punishment by example”?

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • DeeNovember 23, 2012 - 7:38 pm

    Heh,heh,heh

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • what do they have in common?November 23, 2012 - 9:44 pm

    1. General David Petraeus; 2. Marine General John R. Allen (commander of US forces in Afghanistan); 3. General Carter Ham (commander of US Africom); 4. Admiral James G. Stavridis (outgoing NATO Supreme Commander); 5. General William E. “Kip” Ward (commanded US Africom from October 2007 to March 2011); 6. Lieutenant General Patrick J. O’Reilly (Director of the Pentagon’s Missile Defense Agency); 7. Rear Admiral Chuck Gaouette (former commander of the USS Stennis carrier battle group); 8. Brigadier General Jeffrey Sinclair (second in command of the 82nd Airborne Division stationed at Fort Bragg, North Carolina); 9. Commander Joseph E. Darlak (commanding officer of the frigate USS Vandegrifft); 10. Christopher E. Kubasik (fired as president and Chief Operating Officer of Lockheed Martin Corp)

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • Phil VeerkampNovember 23, 2012 - 10:04 pm

    ALSO - Larry Hagman, DEAD TONIGHT! all will meet up at Nibiru - LINK - Right Under Our Eyes - Nibiru On Its Way?

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • Phil VeerkampNovember 23, 2012 - 10:21 pm

    what do they have in common? - I give up. They all relied on Richard for intelligence?

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • James E.November 23, 2012 - 11:36 pm

    What do they have in common? They have all been bad boys.

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • RichardNovember 23, 2012 - 11:49 pm

    The real issue here Veerkamp is our nation has lost the services of a truly great man. I do honestly hope his loss is only short term. General Petraeus is a near priceless asset to the United States. If you had been following the war in Iraq you would know this. His contributions to our nation and in ending the stupid Bush wars have been incalculable. Conspiracy theories flow from the right wing like water from the Sierra Nevada’s. The timing of his resignation obviously raises questions, but the heart of the event is clear. General Petraeus had an affair. He preferred to resign rather than be fired. What was expectable for President Clinton is not okay for other government servants, and we all need to keep that in mind. No group or single man is without fault. This boondoggle does not diminish David Petraeus's contributions to our country, nor his positive impact on the many people under his command that he inspired and those of us who admired him. General Petraeus fumbled; he dropped the ball, he’s a man after all. Why you think you can prejudge this rare a badly needed breed of man by repeating blog post that you have no first hand knowledge of there authenticity in an attempt to change public opinion which is really aimed at President Obama, makes me sick. Veerkamp if I didn’t know you to be a reasonable bright man I would think that maybe inbreeding has lowered you to moron status in your elder years.

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • James E.November 23, 2012 - 11:50 pm

    ADDED: Amazing that so many senior military officers have been recently caught violating the prime military ethic: Integrity.

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • James E.November 23, 2012 - 11:53 pm

    Larry Hagman, died today in Dallas, cause of death: throat cancer.

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • James E.November 24, 2012 - 12:05 am

    Richard, I also hope that the General can come back in some new service to the United States. He has stumbled badly. Adultery is a crime in the military. I note that the media is saying no harm, no foul, as the affair took place after he retired. They fail in their understanding of the UCMJ - a regular Army officer is subject to the UCMJ and liable for court-martial after retirement, and is so until the day he dies. A retired reserve Army officer is not liable. Obviously, the general is a regular Army officer. Even though there are officers and enlisted men currently in the USDB at Fort Leavenworth serving time for adultery, there is no chance that the General will be court-martialed -- no one in the Department of Defense wants it so it won't happen. All that having been said, the general stumbled badly and I hope he can recover in some capacity.

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • RichardNovember 24, 2012 - 12:13 am

    Yes sir, I feel the same.

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • James E.November 24, 2012 - 12:16 am

    This reminds me when I was a young Captain a colonel told me: It's a fast tract, one stumble and you are out of the race. This was the officer corps of my service. One mistake, minor or large, and you were finished. No second chances. And, this contributed to officers taking no chances and never, never admitting to any stumble.

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • James E.November 24, 2012 - 12:20 am

    OK, off to bed. Will return tomorrow ready to excel in convincing my Tea/Republican friends of the errors of their ways.

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • what do they have in common?November 24, 2012 - 5:26 am

    The ten (10) very recently were sacked or are the object of scandals or investigations. - (facile) "They have all been bad boys." - (deep thinker) "General Petraeus had an affair." - Timing is everything.

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • short memoriesNovember 24, 2012 - 6:12 am

    Not everyone considered Petraeus a "near priceless asset", Richard. Not even every Democrat. On 9/11/07 then-Senator Hillary Clinton came close to calling the commander of the multinational forces in Iraq a liar, saying that his progress report on Iraq required “a willing suspension of disbelief.” And then-Senator Obama said to Petraeus, "I'm not sure that the success in Anbar has anything to do with the surge. You yourself said it was political. Changing the definition of success to stay the course with the wrong policy is the wrong course for our troops and our national security.”

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • short memoriesNovember 24, 2012 - 6:20 am

    Hillary Clinton & Barack Obama converted from Tea/Republicans?

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • short memoriesNovember 24, 2012 - 6:31 am

    I know this is a tough one for Richard because he'll have to look it up. Or ask one of his teammates.

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • "blathering about Benghazi"November 24, 2012 - 7:06 am

    Being blinded by political/professional predispositions makes for a very confusing world. Think. It's liberating.

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • "Brendisa"November 24, 2012 - 8:58 am

    spelling isn't the problem

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • Phil VeerkampNovember 24, 2012 - 10:22 am

    Richard, regarding your post - November 24, 2012 - 12:05 AM I agree with your assessment and support your praise of Petraeus. We lost a great one. It was his testimony on or about September 14th that was a HUGE stain on a great man’s record. My personal working theory is that his testimony on that day was forced on him by knowledge of his affair. They had a handle on him. Petraeus’ sense of duty and honor was more insulted by the testimony 9/14/12 than by his sexual infidelity. He saluted and essentially lied to Congress on the 14th. Petraeus’ most recent testimony asserts that his Benghazi report was edited by persons “unknown”. I say bull$hit. The author of the edits is known, perhaps not by Petraeus, but known. Politics is at the heart of the failures of Benghazi. Adequate security was not forthcoming for political reasons. Rapid response was not forthcoming for political reasons. Defining Benghazi as a response to some bull$hit video was a political response. The destruction of a great general was a political expediency. Like you, Richard I am deeply saddened over the loss of a great General. And I suspect that General Carter Ham is another political casualty. I suspect that General Carter Ham tried to help during the attack – resisted the political “stand down” order from politicians. (Bin Laden is dead. General Motors is alive. Al-Qaida is on the run and defeated.) Bull$hit. Our military is now broken.

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • James E.November 24, 2012 - 10:46 am

    What do you guys think about a third term for President Obama? And, maybe even President for Life.

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • Phil VeerkampNovember 24, 2012 - 10:51 am

    Colonel, I am now entering the land of KOOKVILLE. I think it could happen, James. Unlikely, but possible.

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • RichardNovember 24, 2012 - 12:01 pm

    I agree we lost a good one. I don’t care if not everyone considers General Petraeus to be a near priceless asset, Democrat or Republican. General Petraeus will undoubtedly be demonized for his affair, the military and public opinion rightfully should not take violations of the military ethic of personal Integrity casually. The embarrassment to our nation and his family, resignation and divorce will linger when ever history replays his near impeccable career. As the Benghazi issue fads and your party goes onto criticize other cabinet members appointed by President Obama on other issues, I hope he will resume his leadership role in some government capacity. Hopefully the doors of government and industry alike open wide for General Petraeus when hes ready to resume, we can’t afford to lose this remarkable man.

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • James E.November 24, 2012 - 7:17 pm

    Room quiets down while pausing to reflect.

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • James E.November 24, 2012 - 7:40 pm

    I predict Susan Rice will be the next Secretary of State. Why, you ask? Because McCain wants to make a fight of it, and President Obama is ready to fight for his new Secretary of State. He will win.

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • military awardsNovember 25, 2012 - 8:24 am

    forget about susie R. for state sec. the nomination shud go to jill kelley. last year she got a metal from the joint chiefs of staff - THE COUNTRY'S 2ND HIGHEST HONOR FOR A CIVILIAN - for “selfless contributions” and “willingness to host engagements” for top pols and military brass. petraeus recomendedd the award and mike mullen aproved it. and hear we quote: Kelley during a Washington, DC, ceremony received a silver medal, lapel pin and a citation for her efforts. Petraeus presented the award, which recognized the Florida socialite’s “outstanding public service to the United States Central Command, the MacDill Air Force Base community and the Department of Defense from October 31, 2008 to May 31, 2010.” The citation also notes Kelley’s work in “advancing various military endeavors”.

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • military awardsNovember 25, 2012 - 8:32 am

    Kelley and her doctor husband are known for the lavish parties they throw for civic and military leaders at their $1.5 million waterfront Tampa mansion, replete with free-flowing champagne, caviar and cigars. “These events promoted camaraderie, understanding and a better appreciation for coalition and military customs, concerns and abilities,” her citation noted. http://www.nypost.com/p/news/national/kelley_medal_outrage_Fq5K754z1Nntf5uayAFiUO

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • James E.November 25, 2012 - 11:10 am

    Senator McCain has called Susan Rich "not very smart." Well, let's consider this: She is a graduate of Stanford and received her Masters of Philosophy and PhD from Oxford. The Senator is a graduate of the USNA, graduating almost at the bottom on his class in a class of 800 plus. Ms. Rice will be nominated as Secretary of State and will be confirmed by the Senate. McCain would have been better off saying "she is smart," but nevertheless shouldn't be Secretary of State. He would have been on firmer ground.

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • James E.November 25, 2012 - 11:24 am

    Ms. Kelley, is shocked, I'm sure, that she cannot now even gain entry onto the base let alone hanging around the offices of the various generals. Just what generals need: A civilian social director.

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • military awardsNovember 25, 2012 - 12:04 pm

    betcha david p wishes he had axed james e about jill kelley and that social director thing . . . susan rich will be better

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • Phil VeerkampNovember 27, 2012 - 10:14 pm

    Colonel, you asserted, "Ms. Rice will be nominated as Secretary of State and will be confirmed by the Senate." You were probably right. When you made that prediction I gave you 70:30. After her performance today I'll reduce your prediction coming true to 50:50.

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • James E.November 27, 2012 - 11:19 pm

    Phil, it's more like 99-1, as there are enough Democrats in the Senate to confirm her.

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • James E.November 27, 2012 - 11:25 pm

    ADDED: Her performance today was just fine. The evil three continue to complain about her in the hopes the President will nominate Kerry. If Kerry becomes Secretary of State, there will have to be an election in MA and the Tea/Republicans want to get Brown back into the Senate. For this very reason, the President will go to war in support of Rice and the majority of Senators will confirm her. McCain is so transparent.

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • Phil VeerkampNovember 27, 2012 - 11:39 pm

    Colonel, you are aware that under the rules of the Senate 1 (one) Senator has the power and right to place a hold on a nominee? “Holds” have endured until the nomination has been withdrawn. - LINK - Sen. Kelly Ayotte, R-N.H., who also attended the meeting, said of Rice: "I would hold her nomination until I had additional answers to questions."

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • James E.November 27, 2012 - 11:51 pm

    Phil, I am aware of the hold provision. If the Lady from NH does it, she will have to deal with the pressure from NH while the president appoints her when the Senate goes out for XMas. Yes, he can do it because Reid controls whether or not they are in session. The president does not have to worry about being elected again, so he will do lots of unusual things in the next four years.

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • James E.November 27, 2012 - 11:56 pm

    Interesting that McCain doesn't have the gonads to place the hold himself.

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • Phil VeerkampNovember 27, 2012 - 11:59 pm

    . . . and you think the President is neutral wrt keeping the Benghazi lies front and center. Obama "gallantly" said, "Come after me." . . . OK . . . It only makes sense in the context of a distraction from something bigger than Benghazi lies . . . certainly a possibility.

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • James E.November 28, 2012 - 12:07 am

    And, of course the hold can be defeated by a cloture vote. Assume that means 60 Senators would have to vote for her -- 53 good guys plus seven Republicans. Out of 47 Republicans, seven will fold. Or, maybe it will only take 51 if Reid guts the filibuster. As for lies, that is your opinion -- Rice did not lie, she read that which was given her by the intelligence community.

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • Phil VeerkampNovember 28, 2012 - 12:11 am

    . . . Fiscal cliff and Harry adjourns . . . sure . . . no problemo . . . Thanks for the tip . . . . I’m getting ready for a fast move on gold . . . g’night . . .

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • James E.November 28, 2012 - 12:19 am

    Phil, cloture is more likely, but the Senate does like to get home for XMAS.

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • Phil VeerkampNovember 28, 2012 - 12:25 am

    . . . final conjecture of the evening – Hillary is calling the shots - - never ever dismiss the Hildabeast . . . off to bed now

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • robertdnollNovember 28, 2012 - 8:43 am

    senator McCain was in jail as a prisoner of war,why was james e in prison?

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • Do you know this man?November 28, 2012 - 8:51 am

    Robert D. Knoll, 67 of Prescott, AZ died Thursday, August 20, 2009, at the Veterans Affairs Medical Center in Iowa City, Iowa. Committal services with military honors will be held at 2:00 p.m., September 21, 2009 at the Iowa Veterans Cemetery in Van Meter, Iowa.

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • James E.November 28, 2012 - 9:14 am

    I also was a prisoner of war (the special operations war).

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • Phil VeerkampNovember 28, 2012 - 2:33 pm

    Colonel, Chris Tingle-up-my-leg Matthews is whispering in the President’s ear - LINK - Matthews - Maybe a Rice nomination isn’t such a great idea after all

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • James E.November 28, 2012 - 2:41 pm

    Phil, Matthews is wrong 49% of the time. Susan Rice, recess appointment or up or down vote. McCain slapped the President across the face and now the President is going to kick him in the gonads.

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • James E.November 28, 2012 - 2:45 pm

    Phil, read the link. Kerry is the best choice!!! The propaganda continues -- Kerry as SecState, and Brown as the new Senator of MA. I don't know what the President will do, but this is an excellent way for the President to let the Tea/Republicans that he is in charge. It will be interesting.

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • James E.November 28, 2012 - 2:47 pm

    *** know

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • prime timeNovember 28, 2012 - 4:12 pm

    The Real Problem With a Secretary of State Susan Rice: The problem with Republican complaints about Rice isn't that they're partisan; it's that they're trivial.

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • EvelynDecember 13, 2012 - 2:56 pm

    CONGRESSMAN CHAFFETZ: STATE DEPT HIDING BENGHAZI SURVIVORS: He says he has been “thwarted” from seeing any Americans who survived the attack. Many people forget that there were Americans who survived, some of whom were badly injured and are still recovering. ********** http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Peace/2012/12/12/Chaffetz-Benghazi-State-Dept

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • Phil VeerkampDecember 19, 2012 - 6:47 am

    John, it’s time for an update. - Hillary bumped her head and went to bed and couldn’t get up in the morning. She got a doctor’s note excusing her from testifying . . . LINK - Hillary critiques her doctor’s note excusing her from testifying on Benghazi . . . . . . . It’s raining. It’s pouring irony . . .

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • Phil VeerkampDecember 19, 2012 - 7:20 am

    LINK - 31 minutes into this 40 minute podcast - 12-18-12 - discussion of the excluded CLASIFIED State Department report - Clinton and Kennedy off the hook (after loading advance the slider to 31 minutes)

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • Phil VeerkampDecember 19, 2012 - 7:25 am

    OOPS! fix to bad link above . . . LINK - 31 minutes into this 40 minute podcast - 12-18-12 - discussion of the excluded CLASIFIED State Department report - Clinton and Kennedy off the hook (after loading advance the slider to 31 minutes)

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • Phil VeerkampDecember 19, 2012 - 7:33 am

    SHEESH . . . THIRD TIME IS THE CHARM???LINK - 31 minutes into this 40 minute podcast - 12-18-12 - discussion of the excluded CLASIFIED State Department report - Clinton and Kennedy off the hook (after loading advance the slider to 31 minutes)

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • Phil VeerkampFebruary 12, 2013 - 9:59 am

    LINK - Brennan-led secret raids may have led to Benghazi retaliation, book claims

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • Phil VeerkampFebruary 12, 2013 - 10:26 am

    LINK - Benghazi Book’s Outrageous Claims - A new book released Monday claims that John Brennan ran a secret war in Libya against al Qaeda, that David Petraeus was betrayed by senior CIA officers in the scandal that ended his career, and that the U.S. government was sending arms collected in Libya to rebels in Syria. - NOTE: John Batchelor (radio) was reporting "real time" on most of the essence of this book.

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • Phil VeerkampAugust 07, 2013 - 4:23 pm

    Hey, John - If a tree falls in the forest and nobody sees it fall is it a phony tree?

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • James E.August 07, 2013 - 4:31 pm

    Phil, don't overthink it -- if a tree falls and no one sees it, well, it's still a fallen tree.

    Reply | Report abusive comment
.

News

 
Greenwood School being restored

By Rebecca Murphy | From Page: A1 | Gallery

Cal Fire increasing staffing, hiring

By Cal Fire | From Page: B1

 
EID restricts watering days

By Michael Raffety | From Page: A1, 10 Comments

Lover’s Leap fall injures man

By Tahoe Tribune | From Page: A1

 
EDH Fire Dept. annexing Latrobe

By Noel Stack | From Page: A1, 7 Comments

Motorcycle fatality in Greenwood

By Cole Mayer | From Page: A1

 
Tea Party meeting April 17

By Tea Party Patriots Of El Dorado Hills | From Page: A3, 46 Comments

 
Town Hall Meeting on Underage Drinking May 1

By El Dorado Hills Community Vision Coalition | From Page: A6

Floating body not a body

By Cole Mayer | From Page: A7

 
Old mill a goner

By Dawn Hodson | From Page: A11, 11 Comments | Gallery

.

Letters

A great big thanks

By Letters to the Editor | From Page: A5

 
Murder? Suicide?

By Letters to the Editor | From Page: A5, 6 Comments

‘Drive Clean’

By Letters to the Editor | From Page: A5, 3 Comments

 
Middle class getting poorer?

By Letters to the Editor | From Page: A5, 46 Comments

Real estate lies

By Letters to the Editor | From Page: A5, 14 Comments

 
.

Sports

Outside with Charlie: Switch gear

By Charlie Ferris | From Page: A8

 
Ponderosa volleyball is a family affair

By Jerry Heinzer | From Page: A8 | Gallery

Aussie team makes visit

By Special to the Democrat | From Page: A8

 
Griz have challenging day

By Mike Bush | From Page: A8 | Gallery

Roundup: April 15, 2014

By Democrat Staff | From Page: A9 | Gallery

 
.

Prospecting

Runners stampede for Sugarloaf scholarships

By El Dorado County Office of Education | From Page: B2 | Gallery

 
At a glance: Take aim on fun

By Mimi Escabar | From Page: B2

Men to walk a mile in her shoes

By Center For Violence-Free Relationships | From Page: B2 | Gallery

 
Team works to fight disease

By Placerville Kiwanis | From Page: B3

 
COOL School is accepting applications

By Rescue Union | From Page: B4

Band of Miwoks fund mission

By Shingle Springs Band Of Miwok Indians | From Page: B12

 
.

Essentials

Crime Log: March 25-27

By Cole Mayer | From Page: A2

 
Weather stats 4-15-14

By Michael Raffety | From Page: A2

.

Obituaries

Numa Edward “Ed” Roberts

By Contributor | From Page: A2

 
Ronald Russell Rohrer

By Contributor | From Page: A2, 2 Comments

.

Real Estate

.

Comics

Sudoku

By Contributor | From Page: A10

 
Flying McCoys

By Contributor | From Page: A10

Speed Bump

By Contributor | From Page: A10

 
Working It Out

By Contributor | From Page: A10

Shoe

By Contributor | From Page: A10

 
Rubes

By Contributor | From Page: A10

New York Times Crossword

By Contributor | From Page: A10

 
Tundra

By Contributor | From Page: A10

Horoscope, Thursday, April 17, 2014

By Contributor | From Page: A10

 
Horoscope, Wednesday, April 16, 2014

By Contributor | From Page: A10

TV Listings

By Contributor | From Page: A10