Forum Thread

"It's not a lie if you believe it."

Reply to ThreadDisplaying 6 Posts
  • Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        
    Martin Bashir often uses the quote from Seinfeld, "Jerry...just remember...it's not a lie if you believe it."

    I have been watching Mitt Romney lie since he started his campaign for President. At first his lies were easily picked out by his body language and gestures, and the nuances in the tone of his voice, not to mention the forced laugh. Okay and fact checking.

    Later with practice and rehearsed scripts his lies were more convincing, but experts could still notice the little body language things that pointed to his discomfort in telling a lie. In the last debate, however, Romney's response to Obama's answering a question on the Benghazi attack revealed more conviction. It certainly appeared to me that Romney actually believed what he was saying. I have attached the transcript of that part of the debate below, but you have to really watch the video to get an appreciation of Romney's sincere belief that he had caught Obama in a "gotcha moment."

    I won't get into the point of whether Candy Crowley should have interjected a fact into the discussion, but at that point Romney was seemingly dumfounded and looking at her for support when Obama told him to "please proceed governor" and "get the transcript."

    The bigger question is: Why was Mitt Romney so ill informed regarding Obama's "act of terror" statement in the Rose Garden? Did he not see it? Or were he and his staff so fixated on the Fox News narrative, that no one on sought to check the facts. Or alternatively, and this is my personal view, did Romney's aides deliberately withhold that fact from him so he wouldn't betray himself in telling a lie. When Romney speaks with absolute conviction he comes across as more believable, and this is what those prepping him for the debate wanted...a lie told as if it wasn't a lie...a firm belief.

    It's not a lie if you believe it.

    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Transcript

    PRESIDENT OBAMA: Secretary Clinton has done an extraordinary job. But she works for me. I’m the president. And I’m always responsible. And that’s why nobody is more interested in finding out exactly what happened than I did (sic).

    The day after the attack, Governor, I stood in the Rose Garden, and I told the American people and the world that we are going to find out exactly what happened, that this was an act of terror. And I also said that we’re going to hunt down those who committed this crime. And then a few days later, I was there greeting the caskets coming into Andrews Air Force Base and grieving with the families.

    And the suggestion that anybody in my team, whether the secretary of state, our U.N. ambassador, anybody on my team would play politics or mislead when we’ve lost four of our own, Governor, is offensive. That’s not what we do. That’s not what I do as president. That’s not what I do as commander in chief.

    MS. CROWLEY: Governor, if you want to reply just quickly to this, please.

    MR. ROMNEY: Yeah, I — I certainly do. I certainly do. I — I think it’s interesting the president just said something which is that on the day after the attack, he went in the Rose Garden and said that this was an act of terror. You said in the Rose Garden the day after the attack it was an act of terror. It was not a spontaneous demonstration.

    PRESIDENT OBAMA: Please proceed.

    MR. ROMNEY: Is that what you’re saying?

    PRESIDENT OBAMA: Please proceed, Governor.

    MR. ROMNEY: I — I — I want to make sure we get that for the record, because it took the president 14 days before he called the attack in Benghazi an act of terror.

    PRESIDENT OBAMA: Get the transcript.

    MS. CROWLEY: It — he did in fact, sir.

    So let me — let me call it an act of terrorism — (inaudible) —

    PRESIDENT OBAMA: Can you say that a little louder, Candy? (Laughter, applause.)

    MS. CROWLEY: He did call it an act of terror. It did as well take — it did as well take two weeks or so for the whole idea of there being a riot out there about this tape to come out. You are correct about that.

    MR. ROMNEY: This — the administration — the administration — (applause) — indicated that this was a — a reaction to a — to a video and was a spontaneous reaction.

    MS. CROWLEY: They did.

    MR. ROMNEY: It took them a long time to say this was a terrorist act by a terrorist group and — and to suggest — am I incorrect in that regard? On Sunday the — your — your secretary or —

    PRESIDENT OBAMA: Candy —

    MR. ROMNEY: Excuse me. The ambassador to the United Nations went on the Sunday television shows and — and spoke about how this was a spontaneous reaction.

    PRESIDENT OBAMA: Candy, I’m — I’m happy to —

    MS. CROWLEY: Mr. President, let me — I —

    PRESIDENT OBAMA: I’m happy to have a longer conversation about foreign policy.

    MS. CROWLEY: I know you — absolutely. But I want — I want to move you on.

    PRESIDENT OBAMA: OK, I’m happy to do that too.

    MS. CROWLEY: And also, people can go to the transcripts and —

    PRESIDENT OBAMA: I just want to make sure that —

    MS. CROWLEY: — figure out what was said and when.

    PRESIDENT OBAMA: — you know, all these wonderful folks are going to have a chance to get some — their questions answered.

  • Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        
    Further to the discussion, we should note that the Benghazi attack was Romney's "foreign policy trump card"...the single issue that he was going to use to attack Barack Obama on foreign policy. It required Fox News and the rest of the right wing media to set it up for him, and he could easily have gotten away with it except for these words spoken by Candy Crowley:

    "It — he did in fact, sir."

    With those words, the lie that Romney and Fox News was trying to perpetuate was exposed. The Fox News pundits became unglued. Their lie got exposed by Candy Crowley and they took out their venom against her.

    If she hadn't interjected that fact into the discussion, their viewing audience might never have known about the "act of terror" statement by Obama.

    For more on what actually happened during the Benghazi attack, I refer you to an October 15th New York Times article: Election-Year Stakes Overshadow Nuances of Libya Investigation

    "To Libyans who witnessed the assault and know the attackers, there is little doubt what occurred: a well-known group of local Islamist militants struck the United States Mission without any warning or protest, and they did it in retaliation for the video. That is what the fighters said at the time, speaking emotionally of their anger at the video without mentioning Al Qaeda, Osama bin Laden or the terrorist strikes of 11 years earlier. And it is an explanation that tracks with their history as members of a local militant group determined to protect Libya from Western influence."

    Fox News viewers most likely do not read the New York Times. Read the rest of their article at the above link.
  • Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        
    I sure agree with what you've said Schmidt, and that is the way I also believe it happened. However, Bill O'Reilly said last night, about the issue of Obama's saying that he announced it as an act of terrorism to the country the very next day was, in fact debunked on Reilly's show just last night. I know what debunked means, but I sure don't watch Fox hardly ever, so I don't know what he means by it exactly, as I didn't see any of the show he was referring to. Do you have any way of finding out what BS he is claiming?
  • Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        
    This seems so overly covered. It really isn't an issue. Anything to distract. How long did it take to expose the lack of WMDs, Abu Graib atrocities, etc. Sure this was an act of terror, whether it was preplanned or spontaneous. The detailswill have to be sorted out and those reponsible will have to be sought and punished.
  • Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        
    get real Wrote: This seems so overly covered. It really isn't an issue. Anything to distract. How long did it take to expose the lack of WMDs, Abu Graib atrocities, etc. Sure this was an act of terror, whether it was preplanned or spontaneous. The detailswill have to be sorted out and those reponsible will have to be sought and punished.
    It is overly covered, exhaustively accusative in tone, as though the administration had done something unpatriotic, or deliberately careless, because foreign policy is Romney's poorest suit, and I have a sense that the whole video may have had backers who had just this in mind. Everyone seems to forget the concurrent attacks and demonstrations in Cairo, an in other countries in the region.
    So it was a manufactured event--because some sentiment and some groups were already there who were anit-American--that provided the "rightous indignation" and "Excuse" for the reaction of the whole region, and the tragic outcome at Benghazi. See how they continue to ride the subject? Just now I saw on CNN photos that purport to show the state of the building--a regular dwelling--where the consulate was housed, with damaged walls, etc.
    Romney has nothing going in foreign affairs so this is their abusive way of trying to bring embarrasment on the govenment. It is shameful, as it was right away when Romney seized the opportunity to condemn the government, making it blatantly clear that it served him in his campaign to be elected to office.
    The campaign and the Reps continue to be shameful, and just watch and see what they will attempt to come up with. Maybe Romney's "faith" will be enough to bridge both his misleading/untrue statements, and his lack of understanding of the world, and different regional situations, and also, how it all interlocks in this day and age. Let him head up the Latter Day Saints, if he wants more influence.
  • Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        
    Michaels --

    Bill O'Reilly is caught up on the semantics to defend Fox News. Obama's exact words from his Rose Garden statement:

    "No acts of terror will ever shake the resolve of this great nation, alter that character, or eclipse the light of the values that we stand for."

    Bill O'Reilly and others on Fox News saw it otherwise. According to Mediaite:

    "O’Reilly argued that the comments Obama made in the Rose Garden the day after the attacks were more generic, and he was not “specifically” calling what happened in Libya a terrorist attack."

    CNN also has a timeline and fact checks.

    CNN Fact Check: A day after Libya attack, Obama described it as 'acts of terror'

    However, I think this whole discussion diverts from the issue at hand and I agree with the ark:

    "Romney has nothing going in foreign affairs so this is their abusive way of trying to bring embarrassment on the government. It is shameful, as it was right away when Romney seized the opportunity to condemn the government, making it blatantly clear that it served him in his campaign to be elected to office."

    To summarize my views:

    Did President Obama and his administration act responsibly in all the confusion in the minutes, hours and days after the attack? Yes.

    Did they deliberately deceive the American public? No.

    Again referring to the NYT article the attack was indeed more spontaneous and seemed to be a direct response to the video.

    Election-Year Stakes Overshadow Nuances of Libya Investigation

    Romney and Fox News can keep pounding on this subject, but they are sounding more and more out of touch with reality. We'll see how Romney does on Monday.