- WND - http://www.wnd.com -

Questions about scandals 'irrelevant,' 'offensive'

Posted By Joseph Farah On 05/23/2013 @ 8:20 pm In Commentary,Opinion | No Comments

If anyone thinks the Obama administration is going to voluntarily indict itself in three major scandals, that person is fooling himself.

Some insight into the stonewalling came during the Sunday news show:

On “Fox News Sunday,” White House spokesman Dan Pfeiffer was asked by Chris Wallace where in the White House President Obama was during the Sept. 11, 2012, terrorist attack in Benghazi that killed four Americans.

Wallace: “Question, what did the president do the rest of that night to pursue Benghazi?”

Pfeiffer: “Look, the president was kept up to date on this as it was happening the entire night, from the moment it started until the very end. … I recognize that there’s a series of conspiracy theories Republicans have been spinning about it since the time it happened. The question here is not what happened that night. What we do is we want to go out and speak to the problems as they happen. And what’s important here is that when problems happen, the president takes responsibility for them and tries to fix them. That’s what we’re talking about in Benghazi. It’s an absolute tragedy what happened. The question isn’t, ‘Who edited what talking points?’ That’s largely irrelevant.” (Emphasis added.)

In other words: Don’t ask, don’t tell.

The facts are “irrelevant.”

But there’s more.

Wallace: “With due respect, you didn’t answer my question: What did the president do that night?”

Pfeiffer said that Obama was in touch with his national security team, but as Wallace pointed out, he didn’t talk to the secretary of state except for one time after the attack was over, didn’t talk to the secretary of defense, didn’t talk with the joint chiefs of staff as it developed.

Wallace then asked if Obama was in the Situation Room.

Pfeiffer: “I don’t remember what room the president was in on that night, and that’s a largely irrelevant fact.” (Emphasis added.)

In other words: Obama was asleep at the switch.

The facts, once again, are “irrelevant.”

Here’s Pfeiffer, the designated stonewaller, on CBS’ “Face the Nation”:

Pfeiffer once again reiterated that it was “largely irrelevant” who edited the talking points the Obama administration offered up in the aftermath of the terrorist attack.

Bob Schieffer asked: “That was just a PR plan, to send out somebody who didn’t know anything about what had happened. Why did you do that? Why didn’t the secretary of state come and tell us what they knew, and if they knew nothing, say ‘We don’t know yet’? … Why are you here today? Why isn’t the White House chief of staff here to tell us what happened?”

Pfeiffer said it was “offensive” (emphasis added) for anyone to question whether the White House could have done more to save the lives of Ambassador Christopher Stevens and other Americans killed in the attack. He also characterized any suggestion that Obama failed to act appropriately as “conspiracy theories.” (Emphasis added.)

So questioning Obama about Benghazi is now “offensive,” and any suggestions he might have fallen short that night amount to “conspiracy theories.”

Pfeiffer made the rounds Sunday morning and talked to George Stephanopoulos on ABC News’ “This Week” about the burgeoning IRS scandal.

Pfeiffer said the targeting of conservative groups was “inexcusable,” but then resorted to the script by making this incredible statement: “I can’t speak to the law here,” he said. “The law is irrelevant.” (Emphasis added.) “The activity was outrageous and inexcusable, and it was stopped and it needs to be fixed so we ensure it never happens again.”

In other words: The Obama administration doesn’t know if it’s illegal to use the IRS to target political enemies. In other words, there’s no plan to prosecute anyone for this patently illegal activity.

In fact, the whole question is “irrelevant.”

Get the picture?

This is what Obama thinks of questions about the scandals plaguing his administration: They’re “irrelevant,” “offensive” and born of “conspiracy theories.”

That should dash any hope of Obama coming clean of his own free will.

Congress, take note.

 

Receive Joseph Farah's daily commentaries in your email

BONUS: By signing up for Joseph Farah’s alerts, you will also be signed up for news and special offers from WND via email.
  • Where we will email your daily updates
  • A valid zip code or postal code is required
  • Click the button below to sign up for Joseph Farah's daily commentaries by email, and keep up to date with special offers from WND. You may change your email preferences at any time.

 


Article printed from WND: http://www.wnd.com

URL to article: http://www.wnd.com/2013/05/questions-about-scandals-irrelevant-offensive/

© Copyright 1997-2013. All Rights Reserved. WND.com.